House Holds Hearing on UFOs and Government Transparency Transcript

Glenn Grothman (00:00:03):

The subcommittee hearing on unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAPs, will come to order. Welcome, everyone. Without objection, the chair may declare a recess at any time. Additionally, without objection, the following members are waived onto the subcommittee for the purpose of participating in today’s hearing. Mr. Burchett of Tennessee, Ms. Luna of Florida, Mr. Gaetz of Florida, Mr. Burlison of Missouri, Mrs. Ocasio-Cortez in New York, and Mr. Ogles of Tennessee, without objection, so ordered.

(00:00:34):

For today’s subcommittee hearing, both the chair and ranking member will have 10 minutes for opening remarks. We may both be giving some of those minutes to other members of our party. I’m now going to recognize myself for 10 minutes. I’m actually going to try to get out of here in about four, and then we’ll give it to some of my friends over here.

(00:00:54):

Good morning and welcome to the most exciting subcommittee in Congress this week, the subcommittee on National Security of the Border and Foreign Affairs for discussion of unidentified anomalous phenomenon. I’d like to thank the brave military pilots and personnel, such as the witnesses on the panel today, for sharing their stories on how they’ve engaged UAPs, which has brought attention to this matter.

(00:01:19):

Curiosity and speculation from all walks of life have generated interest in studying what UAPs are and what threats they may pose. I will say that when I was younger in school, I read a 1966 book called Flying Saucers, Serious Business. For a while when I was a little bit younger, I thought it was the most important issue out there, the lack of transparency regarding UAPs, which was one of the themes of that book. In any event, it’s led to interest in studying what UAPs are and what threats they pose.

(00:02:04):

The lack of transparency regarding UAPs has fueled wild speculation and debate for decades, eroding public trust in the very institutions that are meant to serve and protect them, as is evidenced by the large number of people we have here. I also want to point out, in 1966, President Gerald Ford claimed to have seen a UFO, and in 1969 in Georgia, Jimmy Carter claimed to have seen a UFO.

(00:02:28):

So this has led Congress to establish entities to examine UAPs, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2022, establish the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office or AARO to conduct or to coordinate efforts across the Department of Defense and other federal agencies to detect, identify, and investigate UAPs. However, AARO’s budget remains classified, prohibiting meaningful oversight from Congress.

(00:02:58):

In addition to AARO’s efforts, NASA is leading an independent study on UAPs to identify how UAP data is gathered from both civilian and government entities that can be analyzed to shed light on the topic. However, despite these offices being established, there lies a pressing demand for government transparency and accountability that cannot be overlooked, and that’s been a problem that’s been around for 50 years.

(00:03:24):

The Biden administration handling of the Chinese spy balloon that violated US air space is one example how the government is not prepared for these. The Biden administration’s description of events has shown that the government continues not to be forthright between the Chinese balloon being shot down and two UAPs subsequently shot down. Following the event earlier this year, the US government spent one and a half million dollars in taxpayer dollars on missiles. Yet, we have seen little clarity from the Biden administration.

(00:03:53):

We must demand transparency from the Department of Defense, our intelligent community, and our defense industry on the UAP work. We’re going to ask some questions about that today. Congress recognizes the subject of UAPs is multifaceted and requires a careful data-driven approach. Today, we’ll seek clarity from these witnesses’ testimonies, and we’ll seek clarity as to what can be done to improve reporting for military and civilians and remain committed to objective inquiry.

(00:04:20):

Congress should work to ensure that knowledge is not driven by fear. Today, we are not just debating the existence of UAPs. We are deliberating on the principles that define our republic, which is a commitment to transparency and accountability. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about ways we can improve government efficiency and openness when it comes to UAPs.

(00:04:41):

I thank each of you for your presence here today and for your dedication to safeguarding the interests of the American people. I look forward to your testimony. Now I’m going to turn it over for two and a half or three minutes to Representative Burchett from Tennessee.

Tim Burchett (00:04:56):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for being here. I want to thank everybody for making this happen today, and I want to remind everybody this is a nonpartisan issue. This has nothing to do with party politics. I think the coverup goes a lot deeper than that. I also want to thank my colleagues, Representative Anna Paulina Luna, sitting beside me here, Jared Moskowitz, my friend across the aisle, who has an incredible mind and I’m anxious to hear his questions, my buddy, Eric Burlison, and it’s not in my notes here, but Matt Gaetz.

(00:05:28):

If it hadn’t been for Matt Gaetz, myself, him, and Luna would still be down at Eglin Air Force Base trying to get some answers. He’s got an incredible legal mind. Also, I know I saw in the crowd there, George Knapp, my buddy, Jeremy Corbell. They’re not witnesses, but they’ve provided some statements on this subject, and I seek unanimous consent to enter those statements into the record. Mr. Chairman?


Without objection.


Also would like to enter in, I understand now that this is unclassified and it’s public record. But as we all know, that’s sometimes difficult for the public to get ahold of a report, Defense Intelligence Reference Documents, Advanced Space Propulsion Based on Vacuum Space-time Metric Engineering, some light reading for some of our members.


Without objection.


Thank you. Mr. Knapp wrote, “Since 1969, the position of our military has been that UFOs pose no threat to national security and are not worthy 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 what was revealed in documents, reports, and internal memos. Mr. Corbell says as he writes these words, “The UFO is emerging as a major topic of global importance.” I can state that as a fact.

(00:06:47):

Out there, I met a fellow who came in here all the way from Denmark to be here for this meeting. So this is huge. This is worldwide. I think we suspect what’s going on. But I’d also like to thank the members of Congress who have supported our efforts to make this hearing happen. Some have even confided to me that they’ve had UFO sightings of their own. Those members, of course, some of them wish to remain anonymous and I’ll keep it that way.

(00:07:10):

But also finally, I’d like to think these three brave witnesses here. They took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and, dadgummit, they’re doing it. We owe them a debt of gratitude. Y’all quit clapping. You’re cutting in on my time. Just kidding. These folks, they’ve got nothing to gain from this, and I think you’re going to find out that they’ve endured quite a few slings and arrows. We need to remember them in our prayers and their families, and I’m thankful to them for their honest testimonies.

(00:07:53):

They have done interviews and appeared in documentaries, like Accidental Truth, to get their stories out there, and now they are all here to testify under oath for Congress. It’s been so difficult to get here today. I’ve said in the Baptist church we’d say that the devil’s in our way, and the devil’s been in our way through this thing. We’ve run into roadblocks from members from the intelligence community, the Pentagon.

(00:08:16):

I proposed legislation to go in the FAA reauthorization that just said if an airline pilot has a sighting, that when he makes that report to the FAA that it would come to Congress. But I was told that the intelligence community did not like that, and the amendment was not even heard in committee. I think it’s time for this country to take back our country. We need to tell the folks at the Pentagon they work for us, dadgummit. We don’t work for them, and that’s exactly the point.

(00:08:45):

This is an issue of government transparency. We can’t trust a government that does not trust its people. We’re not bringing little green men or flying saucers into the hearing. Sorry to disappoint about half of y’all. We’re just going to get to the facts. We’re going to uncover the coverup, and I hope this is just the beginning of many more hearings and more people coming forward about this.

(00:09:06):

I yield back the remainder of my time, I think is it to Representative Luna, Mr. Chairman or is that …


Yeah. We’ll call on Ms. Luna for her statement.

Anna Paulina Luna (00:09:16):

The circumstances surrounding UAPs has captivated the intention of the American people for decades, ingrained in even the minds of our nation’s leaders from Jimmy Carter to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump, Marco Rubio to Chuck Schumer, John Ratcliffe to National Security Council officials. Yet, from Roswell, New Mexico, to the coast of Jacksonville, Florida, the sightings of UAPs have rarely been explained by the people who have firsthand accounts of these situations.

(00:09:41):

This is largely due to the lack of transparency by our own government and the failure of our elected leaders to make good on their promises to release explanations and footage and mountains of over-classified documents that continue to be hidden from the American people. This isn’t just how I feel. In fact, the American people largely believe that the government has actively covered up the truth about UAPs. One poll, in particular, found that 68% of Americans believe that the government is hiding information about UAPs and not being honest about what we know about them and, from my personal experience, I believe the same thing.

(00:10:14):

Another poll found that nearly half of Americans believe that the federal government is doing a very bad or somewhat bad job of dealing with reports of UFO sightings. As Representative Burchett just referenced on the FAA bill that just went through, you can tell that that’s exactly happening. Considering the thousands of testimonies and videos taken on people’s phones and eyewitnesses’ accounts made by credible witnesses, such as doctors, pilots, scientists, and active-duty service members, it is unacceptable to continue to gaslight Americans into thinking that this is not happening or that the potential of intelligent lifeforms exists other than humans.

(00:10:51):

Even more alarming is the fact that these eyewitnesses are, many times, service members and have no assurance that their lives will not be negatively impacted or even harmed by their experiences. In being an active-duty service member working on an airfield, I’ve had conversations with many pilots where they were in fear of coming forward for retribution and/or being taken off flight status. How do we know this? Because the government has said nothing to assure us otherwise.

(00:11:15):

They have also did nothing to calm the concerns of over 20% of Americans who have reported to have seen UFOs or UAPs. We are simply told not to question the government and that the government has it under control. Today is the first hearing of its kind where we will attempt to get down to the bottom of what is actually happening with UAPs, but we will hear from people who have had personal sightings rather than Pentagon bureaucrats who have always been sent to stonewall investigations.

(00:11:41):

Just so that the press knows and the people know, we were even denied access to a classified briefing in a SCIF prior to this hearing due to the amount of hoops that we had to jump through to grant temporary clearance to Witness Grusch, who has knowledge of classified information. It is time to have an open-minded discussion on this topic, to hear the evidence, and understand the magnitude of what this means, not just for our nation but for humanity.

(00:12:03):

Thank you, Chairman. I yield back the rest of my time.


Thank you very much, and I’d like to thank you and Mr. Burchett for bringing this topic to my attention. Now we’ll recognize National Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Garcia for 10 minutes.

Robert Garcia (00:12:20):

Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank first our witnesses for joining us today. I want to begin by thanking you all for your service to our country and for sharing your voices today and your courage to be here as well. To Mr. Graves, I’m particularly grateful to you to spend some time that we had for you to share, with candor, some of your experiences. So I appreciate that as well.

(00:12:42):

I do want to thank all the members of our subcommittee today and also those that are here and have waived on for their incredible interest in this issue, particularly to Congressman Burchett. I know that your leadership has brought us to this place today, and I want to thank you for that, as well as everyone else that’s been engaged in this work. I also want to thank the oversight staff who I know has been working very hard to ensure that today’s hearing is serious, that it’s transparent, and that it also provides appropriate answers, as our oversight body always demands.

(00:13:11):

Now, it’s really important that we’re here in a bipartisan way to have this conversation, which, really to the heart of it, is about national security and key to the subcommittee’s core 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 that get to the heart of our faith in government.

(00:13:37):

Faith in our institutions, as we all know, is at an all-time low. Partisanship and alternative facts make it too easy to doubt narrative or our institutions. But this hearing will offer the public unique perspectives, building on years of reporting by both federal agencies and the independent media. Now, some of the earliest reporting on this issue was a groundbreaking 2017 New York Times report, which revealed research as we know now on unidentified anomalous phenomena or, as many call UFOs, by the Defense Intelligence Agency.

(00:14:07):

Mr. Graves and Commander Fravor’s experiences with UAPs have also been documented by the public, not just by The New York Times, but CNN and many other national news outlets. Now, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has published public reports documenting UAPs, and on June 9, 2022, NASA announced that the agency is commissioning a study to, of course, examine unidentified anomalous phenomena.

(00:14:29):

Now, the sheer number of reports, whistleblowers, and stories of unidentified anomalous phenomena should raise real questions and warrant investigation and oversight, and that’s why we are here today. Now, pilots have reported encounters for years. Now, because of the stigma around reporting these incidents, we still don’t have a complete picture of actually what’s going on, particularly, as your witnesses will testify, on the civilian side, and that is a real problem that we have today in the country.

(00:14:55):

Now, it’s very important that we show that Democrats and Republicans in Congress can come together in a bipartisan way to cut through misinformation and to look at the facts in a serious and thoughtful manner. If we are to advance oversight and public disclosure, we must also gain the broad support of the public. We will succeed getting facts out to the public faster if there is a broad public support as part of the process.

(00:15:19):

Now, I understand fully the Department of Defense is hesitant to share information that could also undermine our national security by revealing information on the capabilities of our own aircraft, our sensors, and other sensitive material. At the same time, many people believe that we’re withholding information from them, and that is dangerous, also. I believe in openness and transparency. That is also the role of Congress, and I want to trust that the American people will be able to weigh the evidence and make up their own minds.

(00:15:47):

Now, we have incidents where sensors, 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 or civilian aircraft, and that must be understood. Now, my career and training as a long-time and career educator and teacher and researcher tell me that we should never rule anything out. We know that our space, of course, is vast and undiscovered.

(00:16:14):

I also want to note that Mr. Sean Kirkpatrick, director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, the component of the DoD office that investigates UAP data, has testified before the Senate this year that his unit has found no evidence of extraterrestrial activity. NASA has also stated that they don’t have evidence of extraterrestrial life either, and we’ve heard this, of course, from some of our government agencies.

(00:16:36):

We should remind viewers and witnesses, which I think is really important, that we also cannot share classified information in public settings. But questions, of course, remain that people want to see data and information for themselves. The enormous interest in the hearing today underscores the importance of a fair and open look at the evidence from witnesses who can share their unique perspectives.

(00:16:56):

Now, I know I certainly have a lot of questions, and I know that all the members of our committee do as well. We should come to this hearing with an open mind, and we should not let our existing ideas restrict us on either side. I hear over and over from many agencies, the stigma around reporting and investigating UAPs prevents us from getting real answers. We know that whistleblowers have reported harassment, intimidation, or stigma as well, and this is not acceptable. If people can’t report incidents which would have national security or safety implications, then that also has serious consequences for us.

(00:17:28):

As ranking member of this subcommittee, I know my job would be completely impossible if whistleblowers or others feel intimidated to come before this committee. We can’t be afraid of asking questions, and we can’t be afraid of the truth. I am proud to say that this hearing builds upon bipartisan work by members of the House and Senate dating many years back, which has sought to increase awareness within the Department of Defense and to mandate more of Congress of UAPs.

(00:17:53):

We know the Senate is taking up an amendment to their Defense Authorization Bill, which will create a commission with broad declassification authority, and we should all agree that that is an important step. Members of both parties and senior officials in multiple administrations have taken an interest in this issue, and we’re proud to carry and build that confidence in the American people.

(00:18:11):

This hearing will also not be the end of this discussion, but a new chapter and start to years and years of work that many folks both in the public and within government have been working on. We should encourage more reporting, not less, on UAPs. The more we understand, the safer we will be. We will hear testimony from witnesses today with a long record of service to the American people and with subject matter expertise.

(00:18:35):

Our witnesses have a unique opportunity to share their perspective, insights, and their experiences with the American people, and I encourage all of my colleagues to engage with these difficult questions with an open mind and to follow the facts on behalf of our country. I also just want to say more broadly that we should look at this hearing and believe that everything is on the table as it relates to UAPs. I think an open mind is absolutely the best.

(00:18:59):

I want to yield the two and a half minutes of the remainder of my time to the representative from Florida, Representative Moskowitz, for an opening statement. He also has been very much engaged in this issue, and I want to thank him for his leadership. Congressman?

Jared Moskowitz (00:19:12):

Thank you, Ranking Member Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank Tim Burchett and Anna Paulina Luna for their leadership in pushing this hearing forward. I want to thank, obviously, committee staff and their staff working on this on a bipartisan basis because many Americans are deeply interested in this issue, and it shouldn’t take the potential of nonhuman origin to bring us together.

(00:19:36):

Additionally, I want to thank the witnesses for coming forward to share your perspectives, your thoughts, and the sightings of UAPs. Unlike other 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. It’s not something that is just going on in this administration. It’s something that’s spanned many administrations.

(00:19:57):

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 public has a right to learn about technologies of unknown origins, nonhuman intelligence, and unexplainable phenomena.” Those are not the words of a UFO Twitter account. That is a direct quote from Majority Leader Chuck Schumer that, “The American public has a right to learn about technologies of unknown origins, nonhuman intelligence and unexplainable phenomena.” In an interview with Fox News, recent former director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe confirmed the US government is aware a lot more sightings of UAPs and that they have not made that information public. I quote, “There are a lot more sightings that have not been made public,” Ratcliffe said to Fox News.

(00:20:48):

For me, this hearing is about transparency. We, unfortunately, live in a time in which many people distrust government and our institutions, and over-classification of information away from the American public or even Congress contributes to today’s politics. The American people have regular questions. What are UAPs? How come the media doesn’t report more on them? Are they foreign adversaries? Are they US technology? Are they something else?

(00:21:13):

They ask themselves, how come when a Russian jet shoots flares at one of our drones, we have perfect pictures and videos to show the American people and the world, but when it comes to UAPs, nothing? Of course, we must always protect our national security to maintain our superiority, like when stealth helicopters were only rumored to exist, but were used in the Osama bin Laden raid in 2011.

(00:21:40):

But we can’t allow that to be used as a shield to keep the American people completely in the dark from basic truths. The American people deserve to hear more about special access programs. Congress has a right to know if there’s any unsanctioned weapons development, satellite imagery that has not been provided to Congress. Congress created the All-domain Resolution Office in the NDAA of 2022. In its initial analysis, there are 171 uncharacterized UAP reports, and this is the words from the report, “that appear to have demonstrated unusual flight characteristics or performance capabilities.” I believe more information is known about the 171 instances.

(00:22:25):

It’s time for Congress to reinsert ourselves. I call on our military leaders and intelligence officials to release more information to the American people about UAPs. To our military leaders, if there’s nothing to conceal, let Congress go to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, the Dugway Proving Ground, or even Groom Lake in Nevada. We should have disclosure today. We should have disclosure tomorrow. The time has come. Thank you, Ranking Member.


Thank you, Mr. Moskowitz, and I would yield back now to our chairman. Thank you.


Right now I’d like to introduce our witnesses. Our first witness is Lieutenant Ryan Graves. He’s the executive director of Americans for Safe Aerospace. Lieutenant Graves is also a former US Navy F-18 pilot with the Zone UAP experience. The next witness, David Grusch, is a former senior intelligence officer with the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and was a senior technical advisor for UAP issues. Finally, retired Navy Commander David Fravor, squadron leader who worked as a naval aviator for 18 years. Mr. Fravor has his own UAP experience known as the Tic Tac event. I look forward to hearing from all three of you today.

(00:23:41):

Pursuant to committee rule 9G, the witnesses will please stand and raise their right hands. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you’re about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Let the record show that all the witnesses answered in the affirmative. You may be seated. We appreciate you all being here today and look forward to your testimony.

(00:24:07):

I’ll remind the witnesses that we have read 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’s on and the members can hear you. When you begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn green. After four minutes, it’ll turn yellow, and the red light, when that comes on, it tells you your five minutes have expired. I’ll now recognize Mr. Graves for five minutes for your opening statement.

Lieutenant Ryan Graves (00:24:37):

Thank you, Chairman Grothman, Ranking Member Garcia, distinguished members of the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Representatives Burchett and Luna. My name is Ryan FOBS Graves, and I’m a former F-18 pilot with a decade of service in the US Navy, including two deployments in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Inherent Resolve. I have experienced advanced UAP firsthand, and I’m here to voice the concerns of more than 30 commercial aircrew and military veterans who have confided their similar encounters with me.

(00:25:05):

Today, I would like to highlight three critical issues that demand our action. As we convene here, UAP are in our airspace, but they are grossly under reported. These sightings are not rare or isolated. They are routine. Military aircrew and commercial pilots, trained observers whose lives depend on accurate identification, are frequently witnessing these phenomenon.

(00:25:26):

The stigma attached to UAP is real and powerful and challenges national security. It silences commercial pilots who fear professional repercussions, discourages witnesses. It is only compounded by recent government claims questioning the credibility of eyewitness testimony. Parts of our government are aware of more about UAP than they let on, but excessive classification practices keep crucial information hidden.

(00:25:48):

Since 2021, all UAP videos are classified as secret or above. This level of secrecy not only impedes our understanding, but fuels speculation and mistrust. In 2014, I was an F-18 Foxtrot pilot in the Navy Fighter Attack Squadron 11, the Red Rippers, and I was stationed at NAS Oceana in Virginia Beach. After upgrades were made to our jets’ radar systems, we began detecting unknown objects operating in our airspace. At first, we assumed they were radar errors, but soon we began to correlate the radar tracks with multiple onboard sensors, including infrared systems, eventually through visual ID.

(00:26:26):

During a training mission in warning area, Whiskey-72, 10 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach, two F-18 Super Hornets were split by a UAP. The object, described as a dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere, came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft and was estimated to be 5 to 15 feet in diameter. The mission commander terminated the flight immediately and returned to base. Our squadron submitted a safety report, but there was no official acknowledgment of the incident and no further mechanism to report the sightings.

(00:26:55):

Soon, these encounters became so frequent that aircrew would discuss the risk of UAP as part of their regular pre-flight briefs. Recognizing the need for action and answers, I founded Americans for Safe Aerospace. The organization has since become a haven for UAP witnesses who were previously unspoken due to the absence of a safe intake process. More than 30 witnesses have come forward, and almost 5,000 Americans have joined us in the fight for transparency at safeaerospace.org.

(00:27:22):

The majority of witnesses are commercial pilots at major airlines. Often, they’re veterans with decades of flying experience. Pilots are reporting UAP at altitudes that appear above them at 40,000 feet, potentially in low Earth orbit or in the gray zone below the Karman line, making inexplainable maneuvers, like right-hand turns and retrograde orbits or J hooks. Sometimes these reports are reoccurring with numerous recent sightings north of Hawaii and in the North Atlantic.

(00:27:50):

Other veterans are also coming forward to us regarding UAP encounters in our airspace and oceans. The most compelling involved observations of UAP by multiple witnesses and sensor systems. I believe these accounts are only scratching the surface and more will share their experiences once it is safe to do so.

(00:28:07):

In closing, I recognize the skepticism surrounding this topic. If everyone could see the sensor and video data I witnessed, our national conversation would change. I urge us to put aside stigma and address the security and safety issue this topic represents. If UAP are foreign drones, it is an urgent national security problem. If it is something else, it’s an issue for science. In either case, unidentified objects are a concern for flight safety. The American people deserve to know what is happening in our skies. It is long overdue. Thank you.


Mr. Grusch?

David Charles Grusch (00:28:45):

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Members, and Congressmen, thank you. I’m happy to be here. This is an important issue, and I’m grateful for your time. My name is David Charles Grusch. I was an intelligence officer for 14 years, both in the US Air Force, both active-duty Air National Guard and Reserve at the rank of major and, most recently, from 2021 to 2023 at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, NGA, at the GSS-15 civilian level, which is the military equivalent of a full-bird colonel.

(00:29:19):

I was my agency’s co-lead in unidentified anomalous phenomena and trans-medium object analysis as well as reporting to the UAP Task Force, UAPTF, and eventually, once it was established, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, AARO. I became a whistleblower through a PPD-19 urgent concern filing in May 2022 with the Intelligence Community Inspector General following concerning reports from multiple esteemed and credentialed current and former military and intelligence community individuals that the US government is operating with secrecy above congressional oversight with regards to UAPs.

(00:30:04):

My testimony is based on information I’ve been given by individuals with a long-standing track record of legitimacy and service to this country, many of whom also have shared compelling evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony to myself and many of my various colleagues. I have taken every step I can to corroborate this evidence over a period of four years while I was with the UAP Task Force and do my due diligence on the individuals sharing it.

(00:30:37):

This is because of these steps, I believe strongly in the importance of bringing this information before you. I am driven by a commitment of both to truth and transparency rooted in our inherent duty to uphold the United States Constitution and protect the American people. I am asking Congress to hold our government to this standard and thoroughly investigate these claims. But as I stand here under oath now, I am speaking to the facts as I’ve been told them.

(00:31:07):

In the US Air Force in my national reconnaissance office, NRO, reservist capacity, I was a member of the UAP Task Force from 2019 to 2021. I served at the NRO Operations Center on the director’s briefing staff, which included the coordination of the presidential daily brief and supporting a variety of contingency operations, which I was the reserve intelligence division chief backup. In 2019, the UAP Task Force director asked me to identify all special access programs and controlled access programs, also known as SAPs and CAPs.

(00:31:45):

We needed to satisfy our congressionally mandated mission, and we were direct report at the time to the DepSecDef. At the time, due to my extensive executive-level intelligence support duties, I was cleared to literally all relevant compartments and in a position of extreme trust both in my military and civilian capacities. I was informed, in the course of my official duties, of a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse-engineering program to which I was denied access to those additional read-ons when I requested it.

(00:32:22):

I made the decision, based on the data I collected, to report this information to my superiors and multiple inspectors general and, in effect, becoming a whistleblower. As you know, I’ve suffered retaliation for my decision, but I am hopeful that my actions will ultimately lead to a positive outcome of increased transparency. Thank you, and I’m happy to answer your questions.


Thank you. Commander Fravor?

Commander David Fravor (00:32:53):

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressmen, Congresswomen. I want to first thank you for the invitation to speak to the committee on the UAP topic. This has been in the news for the past six years and seems to be continuing to gain momentum. As you know, my name is David Fravor. I’m a retired commander in the United States Navy. In 2004, I was a commanding officer of Strike Fighter Squadron 41, the world-famous Black Aces.

(00:33:15):

We were attached to Carrier Air Wing 11 stationed onboard the USS Nimitz and had begun a two-month workup cycle off the coast of California. On this day, we were scheduled for a 2V2 air-to-air training with the USS Princeton as our control. When we launched off Nimitz, my wingman was joining up. We were told that the training was going to be suspended, and we were going to proceed with real-world tasking.

(00:33:38):

As we proceeded to the west, the air controller was counting down the range to an object that we were going to, and we were unaware of what we were going to see when we arrived. The controller had told us that these objects had been observed for over two weeks, coming down from over 80,000 feet rapidly descending to 20,000 feet, hanging out for hours, and then going straight back up. For those who don’t realize, above 80,000 feet is space.

(00:34:02):

We arrived at the location at approximately 20,000 feet, and the controller called merge plot, which means that our radar blip was now in the same resolution cell as the contact. As we looked around, we noticed that we saw some whitewater off our right side. It’s important to note that the weather on this day was as close to perfect as you could ask for off the coast of San Diego, clear skies, light winds, calm seas, no whitecaps from waves, so the whitewater stood out in a large blue ocean.

(00:34:25):

All four of us, because we were in F-18Fs so we had pilots and WSO in the backseat, looked down a small, saw a white Tic Tac object with a longitudinal axis pointing north-south and moving very abruptly over the water like a ping pong ball. There were no rotors, no rotor wash, or any sign of visible control surfaces, like wings. As we started clockwise towards the object, my WSO and I decided to go down and take a closer look with the other aircraft staying in high cover to observe both us and the Tic Tac.

(00:34:52):

We proceeded around the circle about 90 degrees from the start of our descent, and the object suddenly shifted its longitudinal axis,


… aligned it with my aircraft and to climb. We continued down on another 270 degrees nose low where the Tic-Tac… Or we continued 270 degrees and we went nose low to where the Tic-Tac would’ve been. Our altitude at this point was about 15,000 feet in the Tic-Tac was about 12,000. As we pulled nose onto the object within about a half mile of it, it rapidly accelerated in front of us and disappeared. Our wingman roughly 8,000 feet above us, lost contact also. We immediately turned back to see where the white water was at and it was gone also. So as you 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 at your cat point.” Roughly 60 miles away. In less than a minute you can calculate the speed.

(00:35:40):

We returned to Nimitz. We were taking off our gear. We were talking to one of my crews who was getting ready to launch. We mentioned it to them, and they went out and luckily got the video that you see, that 90 second video. What you don’t see is the radar tape that was never released and we don’t know where it’s at or the active jamming that the object put on an APG 73 radar, and I can get into modes later if you’re interested. What is shocking to us is that the incident was never investigated. None of my crew were ever questioned. Tapes were never taken. And after a couple of days it turned into a great story with friends. It wasn’t until 2009, until Jay Stratton had contacted me to investigate. Unbeknownst to all he was part of the ATIP program and the Pentagon led by Luis Elizondo. And there was unofficial official report that came out that’s now on the internet.

(00:36:21):

Years later, I was contacted by the other pilot, Alex Dietrich, and asked if I’d been contacted and I said, “No, but I’m willing to talk.” I was contacted by Mr. Elizondo and we talked for a short period of time and he said we’d be in contact. A few weeks after that I was made aware that Luis had left the Pentagon in protest and joined forces with Tom DeLong, Chris Mellon, Steve Justice, and others to form Two Stars Academy. An organization that pressed the issue with leading industry experts and US government officials. They worked with Leslie Kean, who was present today, Rob Blumenthal and Helene Cooper to publish the articles in the New York Times 2017 New York Times, and it removed the 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.

(00:37:02):

It has led to an interest from our elected officials who are not focused on little green men, but figuring out where these craft are, where they from, the technology they possess, how do they operate. It also led to the Whistleblower Protection Act in the NDAA. There are multiple witnesses coming forward that have firsthand knowledge, and Mr. Grusch just covered that. What concerns me is that there’s no oversight from our elected officials on anything associated with our government processing or working on craft, believe not from this world. This issue is not a full public disclosure that could undermine national security, but it is about ensuring that our system of checks and balances works across all work done in the government using taxpayer funds. Relative to government programs, even unacknowledged waive programs have some level of oversight by the appropriate committee members in the House and Senate and this work that is said to be occurring from whistleblower testimonies should not be exempt. In closing, I would like to say that the Tic-Tac object we engaged in 2004 was far superior to anything that we had on time, have today, or looking to develop in the next 10 years. If we in fact have programs that possess this technology and needs to have oversight from those people that the citizens of this great country elected in office to represent what is best for the United States and best for the citizens. I thank you for your time. Thank you very much.

Speaker 1 (00:38:11):

Thank you very much. I know it’s very difficult for all of you all. [inaudible 00:38:15] asked to try to illuminate this issue. Calling myself first for some questions. I’m going to start with Mr. Graves. Are your pilots or pilots that you interact with as part of your organization, do you feel are adequately trained and briefed on how to handle encounters with UAPs?


No. Right now military witnesses to UAP have limited options for reporting UAP, but more concerning is that commercial aviation sector has not adapted to the lessons that the military has implemented. The military and Department of Defense has stated that UAP represent a critical aviation safety risk. We have not seen that same language being used in the commercial markets, they’re not acknowledging this risk.

Speaker 1 (00:39:00):

What steps do you think you have to be taken to improve a pilots UAP reporting, be it military or commercial?


Right now we need a system where pilots can report without fear of losing their jobs. There is a fear that the stigma associated with this topic is going to lead to professional repercussions either through management or perhaps through their yearly physical check. So having a secure system, reducing the stigma, and making this information available through the public is going to reduce the concerns that aircrew have.

Speaker 1 (00:39:30):

Could you just give me a little idea, the degree to which reports in the past are not made public right now?


Well, I don’t think there has been a proper reporting system to gather those reports and thus not report them. So to answer your question, I think there is a dearth of data due to the fact that the reporting has been limited up to this time.

Speaker 1 (00:39:48):

Could you tell me why you believe it’s, kind of to 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 and our tactical jets to be able to identify these objects. However, there’s no reason that the objects themselves would be classified. I would be curious to see how the security classification guideline actually spells out the different nuances of how this topic is classified from the perspective of UAP and not national security.

Speaker 1 (00:40:18):

I’ll give you a follow-up on that. Assuming that there are reasons why not all this should be made public, this has been around for a long period of time. Can any of the three of you think of any reason why anything related to UAPs say 15 years and back should not be immediately made public?


I think one of it is acknowledging a vulnerability both from a collection and I’ll just say a countermeasure perspective that we haven’t cracked for many years. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (00:40:53):

Even say 20 years back. Is there any reason why when you go back that far things shouldn’t be made public?


Unless it shows a specific national security vulnerability as it relates to weakness in particulars defense system.

Speaker 1 (00:41:06):

Oh, okay. Mr. Fravor, the TikTok incident that you engaged occurred in 2004. What kind of reporting took place after that incident?


None. And we had a standard debrief where the backseaters went down to our carrier Intel center and briefed what had happened and that was it. No one else talked to us and I was in the top 20 in the battle group. No one came. That captain was aware, admiral was aware, nothing was done.

Speaker 1 (00:41:31):

Your commanding officers provide any sort of justification?


No, because I was the commanding officer of the squadron, so no.

Speaker 1 (00:41:40):

Was this incident the only UAP event that you encountered while you were a pilot?


Yes, it was.

Speaker 1 (00:41:48):

This is for any one of you. Based off of your experiences and observations, do you believe UAPs pose a potential threat to our national security?


Yes. And here’s why. The technology that we faced was far superior than anything that we had, and you could put that anywhere. 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 a matter of seconds, do whatever it wants and leave, and there’s nothing we can do about it. Nothing.

Speaker 1 (00:42:27):

You two?


I would also like to add from a commercial aviation and military aviation perspective, we deal with uncertainty in our operating space. As a matter of our professional actions, identifying friend from foe is very important to us. And so when we have unidentified targets and we continue to ignore those due to a stigma or a fear of what it could be, that’s an opening that our adversaries can take advantage of.

Speaker 1 (00:42:50):

What steps should be taken to better understand and respond to UAP encounters, in the interest of national security?


There needs to be a location where this information is centralized for processing, and there needs to be a two-way communication loop so the operators on the front end have a feedback and can get best practices on how to process information, what to do, and to ensure that their reporting is being listened to. Right now, there is not a lot of back and forth.

Speaker 1 (00:43:15):

Mr. Grusch, in your complaint to the intelligence community inspector general, you claim that you believe information is being hidden. What kind of information do you think was hidden and do you think it should remain hidden?


Yes, I could speak to that very briefly in unclassified manner. As you know, the preponderance in my complaint was classified to the intelligence communities. Both material acquisition and exploitation activity. Also, baselining the UAPs but not sharing it with intelligence professionals that are actually doing step briefs to pilots. That kind of information. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (00:43:50):

Thank you very much. Now we’ll go to Mr. Garcia.


Thank you. Again, thank you all for your service and for testifying today. Want to just talk about the UAPs as it relates to what we’re seeing in pilot’s interaction with UAPs. Particularly Mr. Graves, one of the, I think, concerns that for members of this committee is this idea that there’s no system to actually report UAPs and the stigma around pilots. And so just briefly, you mentioned that you’re working with 30 pilots right now that have had encounters with UAPs, but you’ve also, I believe, discussed and know of many more pilots. This is just those that you are currently working with. Is that correct? Can you expand on that?


Certainly. I’ll break that down two ways. First, when we were first experiencing these objects off the Eastern seaboard in the 2014 to 2015 time period, anyone that had upgraded their radar systems were seeing these objects. So there was a large number of my colleagues that were detecting these objects off the Eastern seaboard. They were further correlating that information with their other onboard sensors, and many of them also had their own eye sightings as well of these objects. Now, that was our personal firsthand experience at the time. Since then, as I’ve engaged this topic, others have reached out to me. They shared their experiences both on the military side as well as the commercial aviation side.

(00:45:05):

On the military aviation side, veterans that have recently got out have shared their stories and have expressed how the objects we were seeing in 2014, 2015 continued all the way to 2019, 2020 and beyond. And so it became a generational issue for naval aviators on the Eastern seaboard. This was something we were briefing to new students. This is something that was included in the notice to airmen to ensure that there was no accidents. And now with commercial aviators, they’re reaching out because they’re having somewhat similar experiences as our military brothers and sisters, but they do not have any reporting system that they can send this to.


Let me just add both to Mr. Fravor as well as Mr. Graves. Not having the system for reporting, would you both agree that it’s harmful to not just our national security interests, but to understand this phenomenon of what’s happening with UAPs?


I think it’s a travesty that we don’t have a system to correlate this and actually investigate. So if you took the East Coast, there’s coastal radars out there that monitor our air defense identification zone, so out to 200 miles, they can track these. So when you see them, they could actually go and pull that data and get maneuvering and instead of just having the airplanes, there’s other data sources out there, and I’ve talked to other government officials on this. So you need a centrally located repository that these reports go to. So if you just stuck it in DOD, you wouldn’t get anything out of the intelligence committee. 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 going on, 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 develop something that allows you a central point to collect the data in order to investigate.


Mr. Graves?


I will concur with everything Mr. Fravor said. I’ll continue to say that the commercial pilots that have reached out to me through Americans for Safe Aerospace are doing so because they don’t feel there’s another way for them to report this safety issue.


And I think one of the clear outcomes of this hearing already is that there has to be a safe and transparent reporting process for pilots both on the commercial side and the military side to be able to report UAPs in a way that’s also transparent, but also understands the scope of our national security interests and what may be classified or not. But I think there has to be some sort of system, and so that’s something that I hope can be an outcome that this committee can work on. Is there anything else for just for the two of you briefly, beyond this reporting system that you think that we can do as the government to encourage and facilitate more civilian reporting on the surveillance-


I think we’re doing it right now.


Okay, great.


I think this hearing is going to show the American people that their government takes this topic seriously.


And how about civilians that may not be pilots? What kind of process could be in place for civilians who are not pilots who may have UAP encounters? Do either of you have any suggestions that could facilitate that?


My recommendations would be to make that a sensor centric operation in order to make it as objective as possible.


Sir. Mr. Fravor?


No, I agree with Mr. Graves on that.


Just briefly. I also just want to note particularly for the two pilots and have a question for Mr. Grusch. One of the things that I found fascinating in our discussion, Mr. Graves last night as well, is that you’ve both described UAPs and formations and the way they are observed in space or in our air, and the way that they move is essentially ways in which current technology or aircraft that we know of are unable to actually function or move. And so will you just for the public record once again, just briefly, just either describe or note that aircraft that we witnessed, particularly by the 30 folks that you’re working with, are essentially outside the scope of anything that we know of today and the technology we have today, Mr. Graves. Mr. Fravor?


Yes. The objects that are being seen by commercial pilots are performing maneuvers that are unexplainable due to our current understanding of our technology and our capabilities as a country, and that applies for the military as well.


Mr. Fravor?


Yeah, I concur with that. We have nothing that can stop in midair and go the other direction, 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 you have also said to of these answers in the past, but we’re trying to get them on the public record as well, which is really important. Mr. Grusch, finally, do you believe that our government is in possession of UAPs?


Absolutely. Based on interviewing over 40 witnesses over four years


And where?


I know the exact locations and those locations were provided to the Inspector General and some of which to the intelligence committees, I actually had the people with the firsthand knowledge provide a protected disclosure to the Inspector General.


Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, I would just say that I think that these questions are important questions and I look forward to being involved in the process to get those answered. I know there’ll be a lot of questions from other committee members, so I yield back.

Speaker 1 (00:49:56):

Thank you. We’ll go to Mr. Burchett himself.


Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Garcia. I would like to have you on my legislation to do just that on the reporting and we’ll get together on that. Maybe you can be my co-sponsor on that. That’d be really cool. Thank you for those great questions. Mr. Graves, again, I’d like to know how do you know that these were not our aircraft?


Some of the behaviors that we saw in a working area, we would see these objects being at 0.0 mach, that’s zero air speed over certain pieces of the ground. So what that means, just like a river, if you throw a bottle in, it’s going to float downstream. These objects were staying completely stationary in category four hurricane winds. These same objects would then accelerate to supersonic speeds, 1.1, 1.2 mach, and they would do so in very erratic and quick behaviors that I don’t have an explanation for.


Have you spoken to commercial and military pilots that have seen these off of our East coast?


I have.


Okay. Mr. Fravor, I noticed that in the Tic-Tac video, it’s Tic-Tac, like the candy, not TikTok like the Chinese Communist app?


That’s correct.


Yes, sir. I just want to make that… Because my daughter corrected me on that and called me a boomer and said, “Hey, boomer.” And I said, “No baby, it’s Tic-Tac like the candy. You’re going to have to just look it up.” But now I would also like to say today is the day of many. First it’s a miracle that we’re having this meeting and it’s also a miracle that my wife has put up with me for nine years today. Today is my anniversary, so I want to tell my wife happy anniversary and that I love her very much. As she likes to say this. Nine years have been the best two years of her life, so thank you. Mr. Fravor, what astonished you the most about the flight capabilities of these Tic-Tac, very briefly?


The performance. Absolute performance.


And you’re not aware of any other objects that anybody in the world has in this world that has those capabilities?


No, I think it’s far beyond actually our material science that we currently possess us.


Are you aware of any other reconnaissance platforms that track or recorded the Tic-Tacs maneuvers, maybe the NORAD system or any of the others?


I am not.


Mr. Grusch, thank you for being here, brother. Thank you all very much. Have you faced any retaliation or reprisals 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 open whistleblower reprisal investigation on my behalf and I don’t want to compromise that investigation by providing anything that may help provide somebody information. But it was very brutal and very unfortunate. Some of the tactics they used to hurt me both professionally and personally, to be quite frank.


It’s very unfortunate. As they say, when you rope the target, that’s when they do the most firing at you. Do you have any personal knowledge of people who have been harmed or injured in efforts to cover up or conceal these extraterrestrial technology?


Yes. Personally.


Have anyone been murdered that you would think that you know of or have heard of, I guess?


I have to be careful asking that question. I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.


Maybe if we could get in a confidential area of skiff, we could talk about that. But unfortunately we were denied access to the skiff, and that’s very unfortunate in this scenario. Mr. Fravor, do you believe that you witnessed an additional object under the water in relation to your encounter?


I will say we did not see an object. There was something there to cause the whitewater and when we turned around it was gone. So there was something there that obviously moved.


It was not the same object though that you were looking at, correct?


No. We actually joked that the Tic-Tac was communicating with something when we came back and because of Whitewater disappeared.


We, in another instance, were told about the capabilities of a jamming during viewing when there were some people chasing some of these objects. Did you experience any of that jamming or interrupting your radar or weapon system?


My crew that launched after we landed experienced significant jamming to the APG-73 radar, which was what we had on board, which is a mechanically scanned very high-end system prior to the APG-79. And yes, it did pretty much everything you could do. Range, velocity, aspect, and then it spit the lock and the targeting pot is passive. That’s what we were able to get the video on.


I’m about to run out of time, but are you aware of any of our enemies that have that capability?


No.


Okay. I would also like to note for the record that like George Knapp breaking Area 51, he’s the reason I knew about that and the reason I know about the Tic-Tacs is Leslie Kean from New York Times article, and I would encourage everybody to read that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back to you with no time.

Speaker 1 (00:55:21):

Very good, Mr. Raskin.

US Representative Jamie Raskin (00:55:24):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Graves, you reported UAP encounters during training flights, I think, and have since come forward to warn the Pentagon that these encounters may be putting pilots at risk. My first question is, you’ve identified these as taking place on the East Coast. Is it just on the East Coast where these encounters have been reported?


No. Since the events initially occurred, I’ve learned that the objects have been detected essentially where all Navy operations are being conducted across the world, and that’s from the Altman anomaly resolutions office reporting.


All right. Can you describe your experience after you decided to come forward and go public with your experience?


Certainly. Like many others, in 2017, I saw the New York Times article come out as well. And for me it was special because I recognized the voices on the video. I recognized the video itself. I had seen it when it was taken. I seen it when it was debriefed. And so that shook me because I realized that this problem was still ongoing. And so I reached out to colleagues back on the East Coast and realized that this was still a safety risk that they were dealing with, that they had essentially hit a wall with how they could move forward on this conversation. It was at that point when I decided to try to move the conversation forward myself.


Are there common characteristics to the UAPs that have been cited by different pilots and can you describe what the convergence of descriptions is?


Certainly. We were primarily seeing dark gray or black cubes inside of a clear sphere.


I’m sorry, dark gray or black cubes?


Yes. Inside of a clear sphere where the apex or tips of the cube were touching the inside of that sphere. And that was primarily what was being reported when we were able to gain a visual tally of these objects. And that occurred over almost eight years. And as far as I know, it’s still occurring.


So I take it that you’re arguing, what we need is real transparency in a reporting system so we can get some clarity on what’s going on out there because, there are many pilots in your situation. But we should have a way of developing a systematic inventory of all of such encounters. Is that right?


Yes. And I think we need both transparency and the reporting. We have the reporting, but we need to make sure that information could be promulgated to commercial aviation as well as the rest of the populace.


Mr. Grusch, what about you? What was your experience after you came forward?


Well, it’s only been about two months or so, so I guess my experience has been overwhelming support from former colleagues of mine that have privately messaged me, and I do appreciate that. But I do have knowledge of active planned reprisal activity against myself and other colleagues and it’s very, very upsetting to me.


Coming from where?


Certain senior leadership at previous agencies I was associated with. And that’s all I’ll say publicly, but I can provide more details in a closed environment.


Okay. Well, I hope you understand that there would be bipartisan rejection of any attempt to vilify, demonize or engage in other reprisals against our witnesses and people who are telling the truth from their perspective.


There were certain colleagues of mine that were brutally, administratively attacked. And it actually makes me very upset, as a leader, to see that happen to other coworkers and actually superiors of mine over the last three years.


How do you account for that response? That seems like a bizarre response.


I call it administrative terrorism. That’s their quiver, their tool in the toolbox. To silence people, especially the career government service cares about their career, caress about their clearance, the reputation to climb the ladder. And when you threaten that float career path, a lot of people back off. But I’m here to represent those people.


Mr. Fravor, what about you? What has your experience been since you’ve come forward with your perspective on this?


Actually, I’ve been treated very well. And the six people that were involved, myself included, all of them have or will be retiring from the military as ’05, ’06s. And all my friends that are very senior, three and four stars, I’ve talked to them, they believe they understand there’s a problem. But no, I was actually treated really well.


And what is your general interpretation of these phenomena, or what is your current thinking of trying to make sense of them?


Well, I’ll say I’m not like a UFO fanatic. It’s not me. But I will tell you that what we saw with four sets of eyes over a five-minute period, still there’s nothing, we have nothing close to it. It was amazing to see. I told my buddy I wanted to fly it, but it’s just an incredible technology.


All right, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I yield back to you.

Speaker 1 (01:00:37):

Thanks. Mrs. Luna.


Mr. Grusch, in speaking to you yesterday, I just wanted to follow up on Representative Raskin’s questions. In the last couple of years, have you had incidences that have caused you to be in fear for your life for addressing these issues?


Yes, personally.


Yeah, 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 coming out, why would someone be intimidated like that? To your knowledge, are NHIS working with adversarial foreign governments in either technology exchange programs or back engineering programs?


I don’t have data on that. I’m not sure.


Have you heard or you had people come forward to present that evidence?


Not that particular evidence that you just espoused.


Okay. On the 19th of April, Dr. Kirkpatrick, head of AARO had said that he did not find any evidence of UAPs. You also stated in your interview that you had briefed him on information that you were uncovering, but that he did not follow up with you. Were the items that you divulged to him pertinent to national security?


Yes. Him and I had a classified conversation in April 2022 before he took over AARO in July 2022. And I provided him some concerns I had.


Do you know why he might not have followed up with you?


Unfortunately, I cannot read his mind. I wish he did. I was happy to give Sage counsel to him on where to look when he took the helm of AARO.


Okay. And then my last question for you before I move to Mr. Graves, is you received prior approval from the Defense Department to speak on certain issues, correct?


Correct. Through dosser DOD prepublication and security review. And I just want to remind the public, they’re just looking from a security perspective. These are my own personal views and opinions, not the departments.


I’m asking that though, mainly because I think that there are many people that would like to discredit you. So it does bring a certain amount of credibility to your testimony.


I’m required by law to do that as a former intelligence officer or I go to jail for revealing classified information.


Yeah, we don’t want you to go to jail. My next question would actually be for Mr. Graves. Can you please explain to me in detail the event that occurred at Vandenberg Air Force Base?


Certainly. In the 2003 timeframe, a large group of Boeing contractors were operating near one of the launch facilities at Vandenberg Air Force Base when they observed a very large a hundred yard sided red square approach the base from the ocean and hover at low altitude over one of the launch facilities. This object remained for about 45 seconds or so before darting off over the mountains. There was a similar event within 24 hours later in the evening. This was a morning event, I believe, 8:45 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 through one of the witnesses that have approached me at Americans for Safe Aerospace.


Was this documented in any official form, whether it was a police blotter?


Yes, they had official documentation and records from the event that the witness held over the years.


And I’m not going to ask you to do it right now for time reasons, but you’d be able to sketch what was witness, correct. And you’ve, have you seen that before on any other equipment or during your flight time?


I have not seen what they’ve described. This object was estimated to be almost the size of a football field. And I have not seen anything personally that large.


Okay. And then another question on follow-up referencing the Gimbal video GoFast incident, can you just clarify because to our understanding, the footage was actually cut off at a certain point, but what happens at the end of that video just for those Americans specifically that are wanting to know about the rest of that footage?


Certainly. There was some uncertainty or instability with the object. It seemed to rock a bit and that’s the last I had seen of the video. Much of the data that I would recommend be analyzed would consist of radar data that would provide precise kinematics on the object as well as the fleet of objects that were operating nearby.


And follow up in regards to the reporting procedures that Mr. Garcia had addressed on as well as representative bur Burchett. With the FAA, to your understanding, pilots that are seeing this, commercial airline pilots, are they receiving cease and desist letters from corporations for coming forward with information in regards to safety for potential airline passengers?


I have been made privy to conversations with commercial aviators who have received cease and desist orders.


So the American public should know that corporations are putting their own reputations on the… Not the line, but ahead of the safety of the American people. And I think would you agree with that statement?


It appears so.


I guess this would be my last… Oh, I’m out of time. I yield. I’ll be back.

Speaker 1 (01:05:46):

Good, Mr. Moskowitz?


Thank you Mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, let’s talk about the laws of physics for a second. Mr. Graves and Commander Fravor, I heard you talk about speed. When those objects broke the sound barrier, did they make a sonic boom?


I was in a jet. You can’t hear anything. It’s kind of loud in there.


Yeah, you’re not able to actually personally tell within the vehicle. I will say the objects that we were seeing there were spherical and they were observed up the Mach two, which is a very non-aerodynamic shape.


What about G-forces? Let’s talk about G-forces of those vehicles. Could a human survive those G-Force with known technology today?


No.


No. Not for the acceleration rates that we observed.


Okay. What about what they look like? How close did you get? Did you see a seam or a rivet or a section? And what I mean is obviously the jets you’re flying have all those things. Did these objects have those?


Do you want to go?


I didn’t have the detail to be able to tell that.


So we got within a half mileage zig tag, which people say that’s pretty far, but it’s in airplanes that’s actually relatively close. No, it was perfectly white, smooth, no windows. Although when we did take the original FLIR video that is out there, when you put it on a big screen, it actually had two little objects that came out of the bottom of it. But other than that, no windows, no seams, no nothing.


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


Yes, I personally interviewed those individuals.


Mr. Grusch, as a result of your previous government work, have you met with people with direct knowledge or have direct knowledge yourself about ATs, Advanced Technologies, that the US government has?


Based on conventional advanced tech, I was briefed to the preponderance of the defense departments, both space and aerospace compartment programs. Yeah.


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


Yes, I do.


And when you say that there are above congressional oversight, what do you mean?


Complicated question. So I would call it abuse here. So congressional oversight of conventional special access programs. And I’ll use Title X. So DOD as an example, right? So 10 US code section 119 discusses congressional oversight of SAPs discusses the debts ability to waive congressional reporting. However, the Gang of Eight is at least supposed to be notified if a waived or waived, bigoted, unacknowledged SAP is created. And that’s public law.


I mean I don’t want to cut you off, but how does a program like that get funded?


I will give you generalities. I can get very specific in a closed session, but a misappropriation of funds and self fund.


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


Yes, I have specific knowledge of that. Yep.


Do you think US corporations are over overcharging for certain tech they’re selling to the US government, and that additional money is going to programs?


Correct. Through something called IRAD.


Okay. Satellite imagery. Let’s talk about satellite imagery. We have satellites all over the place. Some that we’re aware of and many that we’re not aware of, right? We’re taking pictures of everything at every point in second. Mr. Grusch, do you have direct knowledge or have you talked to people with direct knowledge that there are satellite imagery of these events?


That was one of my primary tasks at NGA. Since we process, exploit and disseminate that kind of information, I’ve seen multiple cases, some of which to my understanding. And of course I left NGA in April, so that’s my information cutoff date. But I personally reviewed both what we call overhead collection and from other strategic and tactical platforms that I could not even explain prosaically. And I have a degree in physics by the way as well. And I am aware that you guys have not seen these reports, unfortunately. And I don’t know why.


Do you have direct knowledge, have

Mr. Moskowitz (01:10:00):

[inaudible 01:10:00] spoken to people with direct knowledge that this imagery applies to crash sites, crash imagery?


I can’t discuss that in an open session.


Okay. Do you have any information that the US government is involved in a disinformation campaign to deny the existence of certain UAPs?


I can’t go beyond what I’ve already stated publicly in my News Nation interview because it touches other sensitivities.


Okay. I’ll yield the balance of my time back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman (01:10:39):

Ms. Foxx.

Ms. Foxx (01:10:41):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and I thank our witnesses for being here today. Mr. Grusch, in your sworn testimony you state that the United States government has retrieved supposedly extraterrestrial spacecraft and other UAP related artifacts. You go so far as to state that the US is in possession of, “Non-human spacecraft.” And that some of these artifacts have circulated with defense contractors. Several other former military and intelligence officials have come forward with similar allegations, albeit in non-public settings. However, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, the Director of ARRO previously testified before Congress that there has been and I quote, “No credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity.” Or of, “Off world technology brought to the attention of the office.” To your knowledge, is that statement correct?


It’s not accurate. I believe Dr. Kirkpatrick mentioned he had about 30 individuals that have come to ARRO thus far. A few of those individuals have also come to ARRO that I also interviewed and I know what they provided Dr. Kirkpatrick and their team.

Ms. Foxx (01:12:11):

Okay.


I was able to evaluate that information.

Ms. Foxx (01:12:15):

I need to go on.


Sure.

Ms. Foxx (01:12:16):

But my understanding that his statement is accurate, it came from a direct quote and this contradiction is a perfect example of why we need to inject transparency into our government. For another example, look no further than the pitiful response to the Chinese spy balloon debacle earlier this year. You may remember the mass confusion that ensued when the balloon was first spotted over Montana four days after it first entered US airspace over Alaska. The Biden Administration’s initial inability to address the object grew into a continuous series of embarrassments. After news of the balloon reached the mainstream media, we were assured that the balloon posed no threat to our security. However, after the balloon was allowed to transit the entire continental United States fighter jets were scrambled off the coast of South Carolina to shoot it down. This flip-flopping and obfuscation caused needless confusion, fear, and panic across the country. It’s my hope Mr. Chairman, that this sort of confusion will not be repeated. We should investigate the extent to which elements of our government possess or do not possess information that is of critical value to the American people.

(01:13:48):

We owe it to the citizens of this nation to make sure that our government is transparent and accountable. We must make sure that our government provides answers and Congress must do its duty to solicit those answers. With that, Mr. Chairman I yield back.


Yeah. Mr. Frost.

Mr. Frost (01:14:11):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In 2022, NASA announced that it was commissioning an independent study team to examine UAPs. The NASA team is comprised of scientists across different fields as well as former astronauts and pilots. In May the independent study team held that its first public meeting, which included the perspectives from NASA senior leaders as well as perspectives from the Department of Defense and intelligence agencies. The NASA study team is also expected to release its first report pretty soon, and I think it’s safe to say that we all eagerly await its results. Mr. Graves, how might NASA’s research influence the commercial industry regarding safety and UAP?


I think NASA has a big role to play as far as commercial aviation safety, and it’s one of their original charges as an organization. One of the recommendations that have been put forward is to utilize their existing aviation safety reporting system to serve as a short-term fill and trusted platform for pilots that want to report on UAP. It also has built-in analytics capability and is funded by Congress.

Mr. Frost (01:15:16):

Gotcha, and also Mr. Graves are there any other industries that may be influenced by the NASA research on the UAPs, and if so how so?


Well, I think there is a large swath of commercial capabilities that could be brought to bear on this topic from space-based or ground-based sensor systems that are available open source or through commercial marketplaces. I think NASA’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 sector so that we can have more open conversation about what we’re seeing.

Mr. Frost (01:15:48):

In 2020, the Department of Defense released several videos of UAPs, including Mr. Fravor’s experience, US Navy pilots that recorded footage. In 2021, the office of the Director of National Intelligence released a preliminary report on UAP events. NASA administrator, Bill Nelson stated that NASA would begin to investigate these events. In fact, I sit on the Science, Space and Technology Committee and when we were doing a hearing with the NASA administrator Bill Nelson. I asked why NASA needed to be fully funded and there were many great reasons, but one of them actually had to do with UAPs. They actually mentioned is there life out there? I don’t know. So either way, these actions ultimately led NASA to assemble the independent study team that I mentioned earlier. Also, in 2021 Harvard University stood up the Galileo Project to research and examine the origins of UAP. So it seems like both from NASA and the higher education community, because of the work that y’all have done and people standing up I think we’re seeing some of that stigma slowly going away.

(01:16:59):

Mr. Fravor, do you believe that military pilots feeling empowered to share their UAP experiences has directly impacted the scientific communities research goals on this topic?

CDR. Fravor (01:17:12):

I would say yes. I would say that starting in 2017 when it actually came out it took that stigma away. I mean, I’ve talked to multiple senators who said prior to that if you’d have mentioned UAP you’d have been laughed off the hill and now we’re sitting here today for a public testimony on what’s actually going on. I’m hoping that this curve will be more of an exponential and we’ll get more and more transparent to the level that we can.

Mr. Frost (01:17:36):

Yeah, and it’s important. I couldn’t imagine, I’m not a pilot but I used to fly gliders in civil air patrol. Huh? Yeah.

CDR. Fravor (01:17:46):

A pilot?

Mr. Frost (01:17:50):

So either way, I mean I couldn’t imagine being in the glider and seeing something and then not feeling like I had the agency to talk about it. Mr. Graves, can you discuss 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 only that it’s also an engineering problem. I’ve been working with the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics to help them stand up a UAP integration committee to help integrate their engineering prowess into this problem. So yes, very much I think this is an engineering and scientific problem as much as national security problem.

Mr. Frost (01:18:26):

How might Congress help to facilitate partnerships between the scientific community and the UAP focus groups within government?


Well, I think one of the things they can do is to have these types of hearings to communicate to the public that this is a topic of interest. I think that there is a pseudo market, if you will of interested capabilities and talent that want to approach this topic and we’re seeing that start to grow now. So I think continued conversation, reduction of stigma is going to allow that to flourish and allow answers to help generate themselves.

Mr. Frost (01:18:54):

100%. Well, thank you all for being here and thank you for your work. I think it’s important that we keep our top scientific minds focused on this issue and look for ways to increase collaboration. Thank you so much, I yield back.


Mr. Comer.

Mr. Comer (01:19:07):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me say, I want to thank you for having this hearing and I want to thank Mr. Burchett, Ms. Luna for leading this hearing and with that I yield my five minutes to Mr. Burchett.


Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I’m going to direct this I believe to Mr. Grusch, but if any of you all feel like you need to jump in just jump right and we’re good. Has the US government become aware of actual evidence of extraterrestrial otherwise unexplained forms of intelligence? And if so, when do you think this first occurred?


I like to use the term non-human, I don’t like to denote origin. It keeps the aperture open both scientifically.


Right.


Certainly like I’ve discussed publicly, previously 1930s.


Okay. Can you give me the names and titles of the people with direct firsthand knowledge and access to some of these crash retrieval programs and maybe which facilities, military bases that the recovered material would be in? I know a lot of Congress talked about we’re going to go to Area 51 and there’s nothing there anymore anyway, and we move like a glacier and as soon as we announce it I’m sure the moving vans would pull up. But please.


I can’t discuss that publicly, but I did provide that information both to the Intel committees and the Inspector General.


We could get that in the skiff if we were allowed to get in a skiff with yo?. Would that be probably what you would think?


Sure, if you had the appropriate accesses. Yeah.


What special access programs cover this information and how is it possible that they have evaded oversight for so long?


I do know the names. Once again, I can’t discuss that publicly and how they’ve evaded oversight. In a closed setting I can tell you the specific trade craft used.


All right. When do you think those programs began and who authorized them?


I do know a lot of that information, but that’s something I can’t discuss publicly because of sensitivities.


All right. If any of y’all want to jump in on any of this, you’re more than welcome to. What level of security clearance is required to fully access these programs?


Well, anybody who has-


I say that because myself, Representative Gaetz and Representative [inaudible 01:21:20] were basically turned away at one point at Eglin. So please go right ahead.


Certainly the difference between member access and say somebody like me, but anybody who has a TS/ SCI clearance and meets the eligibility criteria. The access adjudicated authority should be able to grant you access.

Mr. Gaetz (01:21:36):

Mr. Burchett if you’ll yield. So just to put a fine point on that, there’s nothing that you’re aware of that’s above special access program classification?


It’s a misnomer that there’s anything actually above top secret, Executive Order 13526 delineates the classification levels.

Mr. Gaetz (01:21:52):

Right. But I draw a point on that because we can have access to those programs, and so the notion that we’re not being given that access sort of defies our typical muscle memory here in Congress. Thank you. Mr. Burchett, I yield back to you.


Thank you. Mr. Gaetz. Along those lines, Title 10… And you may not know this or not. But Title 10 and Title 50 authorization as they seem to say they’re inefficient, so who gets to decide this in your opinion in the past?


It’s a group of career senior executive officials.


Okay. Are they government officials?


Both in and outs.


Do what?


Both in and outs of government, and that’s about as far as I can go there.


I got you.


Yeah.


All right. Well, that leads to my next question. Which private corporations are directly involved in this program? How much taxpayer money has been invested in these programs to your knowledge? I mean, we know we audit the Pentagon every year and I’ve been here five years and they failed the dadgum thing every year. They lose over a billion dollars a year we think, and I’ve told the Department of Defense maybe 60% of their assets are unaccounted for whatever the heck that means. In the public sector you go to jail for that kind of crap, so tell me.


Yeah. I know when I’m a dollar off of my DTS travel voucher I get hammered, but it seems like it doesn’t work the other way. Right?


If you sell over $600 worth of stuff on eBay now you get a call from the IRS. So please, what corporations?


Yeah. I don’t know the specific metrics towards the end of your question, the specific corporations I did provide to the committees in specific divisions and I spent 11 and a half hours with both Intel committees.


Okay. Has there an active US government disinformation campaign to deny the existence of unidentified aerial phenomena, and if so why?


I can’t go beyond what I’ve already espoused publicly about that.


[inaudible 01:23:58]. Okay. I’ve been told to ask you what that is and how to get it in the record?

Speaker 2 (01:24:11):

What have you stated publicly in your interviews for the congressional record?


Yeah.


If you reference my News Nation interview and I talk about a multi-decade campaign to disenfranchise public interest basically.


[inaudible 01:24:26].


Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:24:26):

Thank you.


I apologize Mr. Chairman, I yield back negative 21 seconds.


Thank you, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez (01:24:35):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for coming here today. I do concur with the ranking members as well as several other members here on this committee, that this is a committee for whistleblowers and for the protection of whistleblowers as well. So we understand what you’re putting on the table here and what you’re putting on the line here, and we thank you for that. Mr. Grusch, you sat on the Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon Task Force created in the 2020 NDAA. Correct?


Yes.


There have been some things that have been mentioned here during this hearing that I wanted to pick up on. Mr. Graves, you mentioned specifically during the answers to one of your questions. You named Boeing contractors being engaged in an incident regarding this red cube about a football field wide. I was wondering if you could speak a little bit about the interaction or Mr. Grusch, either of you. The interactions between defense contractor companies and any UAP related programs or activities.


So I’ll just say that the information about the contractor themself were provided by a witness, and I have no particular detail in that relationship.


Mr. Grusch,


The kind of general on class wave tops, certainly the contractors or the metal benders so to speak. They’re the ones actually doing specific performance on government contracts.


Are they required to issue any disclosure regarding UAP sightings or do they engage in any reporting around this?


In terms of the contractors?


Yes.


Not that I’m aware of.


They do not? Okay. Now, when it comes to notification that you had mentioned about IRAD programs. We have seen defense contractors abuse their contracts before through this committee. I have seen it personally, and I have also seen the notification requirements to Congress abused. I am wondering, one of the loopholes that we see in the law is that there is… At least from my vantage point. Is that depending on what we’re seeing is that there are no actual definitions or requirements for notification. What methods of notification did you observe? When they say they notified Congress how did they do that? Do you have insight into that?


For certain IRAD activities and I can only think of one’s conventional in nature, sometimes they flow through certain I’ll just say SAP programs that have cognizant authority over the Air Force or something, and those are congressionally reported compartments. But IRAD is literally internal to the contractors. So as long as it’s money, either profits, private investment, etc, they can do whatever they want.


To put a finer point on it. When there is a requirement for any agency to notify Congress, do they contact the chairman of a committee? Do they get them on the phone specifically? Is this through an email to hypothetically a dead email box?


A lot of it comes through what they call the PPR, a periodic program review process. If it’s a SAP or a controlled access program equity, and then those go to the specific committees whether it be the SASC, HASC, [inaudible 01:27:47].


Thank you. I apologize, just my time is limited. Mr. Graves, one of your main concerns is that the FAA currently does not have an official process to receive reports of UAP from pilots or others. Correct?


Correct.


In your experience, what data should the ARRO program prioritize for potential collection? We have location, date, time, but are there other specific characteristics that should be included in these reports?


Certainly, I think that there’s two categories that would be important. One would be kinematics and understanding the specifics of how the vehicle or objects are moving and the second would be a more zoomed out approach of being able to look at origin and destination after or before the incident. As well as getting a better contextual understanding of how these objects are interacting with each other.


Thank you. Now, because I only have a minute left I apologize we only have five minutes today. But for the record, if you were me where would you look? Titles, programs, departments, regions, if you could just name anything and I put that as an open question to the three of you.


I’d be happy to give you that in an enclosed environment, I can tell you specifically.


Thank you, Commander Fravor.

CDR. Fravor (01:29:08):

I would say and I’ve told people that you have to know where to look, they’re not going to divulge it to you because of the classification levels. But if you know where to look and who to talk to, which is exactly where Mr. Grusch can point you then you have them.


Okay. Mr. Graves.


I was an operator, so I was defending on folks like Mr. Grusch to do that homework.


Okay. Thank you very much, I yield back to the chair.


Mr. Biggs.

Mr. Biggs (01:29:30):

Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I thank the witnesses for being here today. I’m over here. Thank you so much for being here. I want to get into specifics here, and the reason I’m going to go this way is because you’ve talked a bit about what I would call misdirection by official US government with regard to UAPs. Right? So I’m going to get to that in a second. But last week White House NSC Spokesman John Kirby, stated that UAPs are having an impact on our training ranges and needs to be treated as a legitimate issue. Do you concur with the statements that’s for each of you?


Yes.


Yes.

CDR. Fravor (01:30:16):

Yes.

Mr. Biggs (01:30:17):

Okay. Now having said that, I’m going to take you to specific instances around the Phoenix Valley because that’s where I live and in 97 we had the famous Phoenix Light case. I don’t know if any of you’re familiar with that? There were two things that went along with that, and the explanation was the military training range off Luke and the Barry Goldwater Range. Do you know anything different other than the official explanation of those lights?


Only what’s in the public vernacular about it, that was outside the scope of my duties.

Mr. Biggs (01:30:57):

If we wanted to, just my question along with my colleague from New York Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. If we wanted to find out more about that, where would we go to find the files and who would we address? I know you’re going to tell me we need to go to a skiff so you can tell us in a skiff.


I could potentially give you a vector on that. That specific case I’m familiar with it in terms of public, but I can give you a vector in an enclosed environment. Yeah.

Mr. Biggs (01:31:22):

That would be good, thank you. So if it’s true that UAPs are having an impact on training ranges and this administration considers it to be a legitimate issue. What steps can Congress take to address training range impacts? I say that having two very large training ranges in my state and so we’ll start with Mr. Graves and going down the panel.


Some of the initial procedures have been implemented such as within the United States Navy that have a range file report that gathers information from pilots. I understand that a service-wide reporting mechanism is still pending. However, that would be a great next step. Not only for gathering information, but for showing the troops that it is an acceptable topic and reducing the stigma.

Mr. Biggs (01:32:06):

Okay, please all of you continue.


Yeah. As a recipient of a lot of those training range reports, sometimes we only get contextual kind of oral reporting. It’d be nice if they attached all sensor data and there’s a system in place that can handle multiple classifications of data and that’s an issue with the F-35. Right? That jet was never built to be an ISR platform and it’s a pain in the we’ll just say butts to get that data off.

Mr. Biggs (01:32:31):

Yeah, great. Thank you.

CDR. Fravor (01:32:34):

Yeah, I would agree with the previous two being a user of those training ranges that the data has to be out there. You have to acknowledge that you’re seeing them, and then you have to collect the data. Right now you get the report, someone says I saw something but no one collects the radar data to back it up and do research.

Mr. Biggs (01:32:48):

Okay. Do you believe that the 2019 classification guidelines for UAPs interferes with the federal government’s ability to be transparent with the American people? Do you think we need to be more transparent with the American people, all of you? Yeah.


I’ll say yes to that.


Yeah. I’m familiar with at least the UAP Task Force 2019 security classification guide. I think it’s fair, I did actually help author that with the director.

Mr. Biggs (01:33:15):

Oh, you got a bias that way then?


Yeah. But I will say, I’ll call it a lazy attitude about declassifying videos. I mean, I’ve seen some of the videos of the recent shootdown and I saw no reason that couldn’t have been released as long as they mask some data. The American people deserve to see that imagery in full motion video.

CDR. Fravor (01:33:39):

Well, in my opinion I will say things are over classified. I know for a fact the video or the pictures that came out in I think it was the 2020 report that had the stuff off the east coast that were taken with an iPhone off the east coast. A buddy of mine was one of the senior people there, and he said they originally classified a TS/SCI and my question to him was, “What’s TS/SCI about these?” They’re an iPhone literally off the VACAPES, that’s not TS/SCI. So they’re over classified and as soon as they do that they go in a vault and then you all have to look for them.

Mr. Biggs (01:34:06):

Yeah. So with the over classification, that may be one way. Are there other ways that the DoD or intelligence agencies are keeping this information from the American people or even from Congress?


I think part of that has been not encouraging reporting. If the problem is not something that can be measured, it’s not something that’s going to be fixed.

Mr. Biggs (01:34:25):

Okay, very good. Well, I’m out of time and I thank you Mr. Chairman and I yield back.


First of all without objection, representative Nick Langworthy of New York has waived on the subcommittee for purpose of questioning witnesses as today’s subcommittee hearing and then we go to Mr. Burlison.

Mr. Burlison (01:34:45):

Thank you Mr. Chairman. Appreciate you guys coming out today testifying. Look, I’ve been here for six months and I’m pretty skeptical, I don’t trust anything in this town and I think that’s because I’m from Missouri you’ve got to show me. Right? With that being said, there’s been a lot of things that have been said in the public Mr. Grusch, and so I want to get down to if we can some specifics. Right? So at one point you had said that there has been harmful activity or aggressive activity. Has any of the activity been aggressive, been hostile in your reports?


I know of multiple colleagues of mine that got physically injured and the activity I-


By UAPs or by people within the federal government?


Both.


Okay. So there has been activity by alien or non-human technology and/or beings that has caused harm to humans?


I can’t get into the specifics in an open environment. But at least the activity that I personally witnessed, and I have to be very careful here because they tell you never to acknowledge trade craft. Right? So what I personally witnessed myself and my wife was very disturbing.


Okay. One of my constituents actually sent this next question, and I figured I’d ask it since I had the same thought. You’ve said that US has intact spacecraft, you said that the government has alien bodies or alien species. Have you seen seen the spacecraft?


I have to be careful to describe what I’ve seen firsthand and not in this environment, but I could answer that question behind closed doors. Yeah.


Have you seen any of the bodies?


That’s something I’ve not witnessed myself.


Okay. So with that being said, and the other statement that has been made that was intriguing to me and it’s intriguing because my view has been that we are billions of light years away from any other system. The concept that an alien species that’s technologically advanced enough to travel billions of light years gets here and somehow is incompetent enough to not survive earth or crashes, is something that I find a little bit farfetched. With that being said, you have mentioned that there’s interdimensional potential. Could you expound on that?


Oh yeah, to answer your first question and I’m here as a fact witness and expert. But I will give you a theoretical framework at least to work off to kind of espouse crashes. Regardless of your level of sentience, right? Planes crash, cars crash, and number of sorties however high a small percentage you’re going to end in mission failure if you will as we say in the Air Force and then in terms of multi-dimensionality, that kind of thing. The framework that I’m familiar with for example, is something called the holographic principle. It derives itself from general relativity and quantum mechanics and that is, if you want to imagine 3D objects such as yourself casting a shadow onto a 2D surface. That’s the holographic principle. So you can be quasi projected from higher dimensional space to lower dimensional. It’s a scientific trope that you can actually cross literally as far as I understand. But there’s probably guys with PhDs that we could probably argue about that.


But you have not seen any documentation that that’s what’s occurring? This is theory?


Only a theoretical framework discussion, yes.


Okay. Occam’s razor, is these aircraft have they been identified that they are being produced by domestic, military and contractors? Is there any evidence that what’s being recovered?


Not to my knowledge, plus the recoveries predate a lot of our advanced programs that I previously am witting of.


Would it be safe to say that there could be scenario today where you have an aircraft that crashes and because it’s been involved in one program from one federal agency. But the agency that retrieves it is not aware of that program, and to them it appears alien in origin?


I mean, that’s a hypothetical situation. I’m not aware of any historical situation that would match that, that you described.


It has not happened that you’re aware of?


That I’m aware of.


Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back

Mr. Gaetz (01:39:57):

Several months ago, my office received a protected disclosure from Eglin Air Force Base indicating that there was AUP incident that required my attention. I sought a briefing regarding that episode and brought with me Congressman Burchett and Congresswoman Luna. We asked to see any of the evidence that had been taken by flight crew in this endeavor and to observe any radar signature as well as to meet with the flight crew. We were not afforded access to all of the flight crew, and initially we were not afforded access to images and to radar. Thereafter, we had a bit of a discussion about how authorities flow in the United States of America and we did see the image and we did meet with one member of the flight crew who took the image. The image was of something that I am not able to attach to any human capability, either from the United States or from any of our adversaries.

(01:40:58):

And I’m somewhat informed on the matter having served on the Armed Services Committee for seven years, having served on the committee that oversees DARPA and advanced technologies for several years. When we spoke with the flight crew and when he showed us the photo that he’d taken I asked why the video wasn’t engaged? Why we didn’t have a FLIR system that worked? Here’s what he said. They were out on a test mission that day over the Gulf of Mexico and when you’re on a test mission you’re supposed to have clear airspace, not supposed to be anything that shows up. They saw a sequence of four craft in a clear diamond formation for which there is a radar sequence that I and I alone have observed in the United States Congress. One of the pilots goes to check out that diamond formation and sees a large floating what I can only describe as an orb. Again, like I said not of any human capability that I’m aware of and when he approached he said that his radar went down.

(01:42:02):

He said that his FLIR system malfunctioned and that he had to manually take this image from one of the lenses and it was not automated in collection as you would typically see in a test mission. So I guess I’ll start with Commander Fravor. How should we think about the fact that this craft that was approached by our pilot had the capability of disarming a number of the sensor and collection systems on that craft?

CDR. Fravor (01:42:36):

Well, I think this goes to that national security side and you can go back through history of things showing up at certain areas and disabling our capabilities. Which is disheartening and for us, I mean like I said it completely disabled the radar and the aircraft when I tried to do it and the only way we could see it is passively which is how he got that image. So I think that’s a concern on what are these doing, not only how do they operate but their capabilities inside to do things like this.

Mr. Gaetz (01:43:01):

How should we think about four crafts moving in a very clear formation equidistant from one another in a diamond? In all of the phenomenon perhaps Mr. Grave that you’ve analyzed have we ever seen multiple craft in a single formation?


I have one particular case, and that was during the Gimbal incident. The recording on the ATFLIR system shows a single object that rotates. You hear the pilots refer to a fleet of objects that is not visible on the FLIR system, and that was something that I witnessed during the debrief as part of the radar data on the situational awareness page. I would like to add however congressman, there’s a small bit of anger I would say. I would feel that those pilots are still facing that difficulty in reporting this topic, and they don’t have the tools to be able to mitigate this issue. It just goes to show how serious this is and why this is such an important issue for our pilots and for our nation.

Mr. Gaetz (01:43:58):

It was stated explicitly to me by these test pilots that if you have a UAP experience, the best thing you can do for your career is forget it and not tell anyone. Because any type of reporting either above the surface or below the surface does have a perceived consequence to these people and that is a culture we must change if we want to get to the truth. Mr. Chairman, I would observe that perhaps as we move forward from this hearing there are some obvious next steps. Every person watching this knows that we need to meet with Mr. Grusch in a secure compartmentalized facility, so that we can get fulsome answers that do not put him in jeopardy and that give us the information we need. Second, I would suggest that the radar images that were collected of this formation of craft out of Eglin Air Force Base and specifically the actual image taken by the actual flight crew that we can actually validate be provided to the committee, subpoenaed

US Representative Matt Gaetz (01:45:00):

… [inaudible 01:45:00] if necessary, so that we’re able to track how to get this type of reporting and analysis done in a more fulsome way. That would be my recommendation, humbly, as a guest here of the fine Oversight Committee. I yield back.

US Representative Glenn Grothman (01:45:14):

Ms. Mace.

US Representative Nancy Mace (01:45:17):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And good morning to our witnesses who are testifying today. I want to thank each of you for being here to discuss a topic of grave importance to our national security. Earlier this year, a Chinese spy balloon was shot down off the coast of my home state of South Carolina. Since the Roswell incident in 1947, many Americans have wondered about the dangers of unknown objects crisscrossing our skies, whether these are UAPs or weather phenomena, advanced technology from American allied or enemy forces or something more out of this world.

(01:45:49):

So my first question, I have several questions, and if we could just be quick on these first two, I’m going to ask each of you the same question and then I’ll get to each of you individually. The first one, when you reported your experiences with a UAP, did any of you face any repercussions with your superiors, yes or no?


No.

CDR. Fravor (01:46:06):

No.


I’ve actually never seen anything personally, believe it or not, so.


All right. And then do you believe there’s an active disinformation campaign within our government to deny existence of UAPs, yes or no?


I don’t have an answer to that.


As previously stated, publicly, yes.

CDR. Fravor (01:46:29):

I think previously, with Project Blue Book, yes. But currently I don’t speak for the United States government.


Okay, thank you. I have a few questions for Mr. Graves. What percentage of UAP sightings in your belief go unreported by our pilots?


This is an approximation based off of my personal experience speaking with a number of pilots, but I would estimate we’re somewhere near 5% reporting perhaps.


So 95% basically don’t report seeing UAPs?


That’s just my personal estimate.


In the incident off Virginia Beach, do you believe the Navy took the danger to your aircraft seriously after it was reported?


Absolutely.


A few questions for Mr. Favor. As an expert naval aviator, have you ever seen an object that looked and moved like the Tic Tac UAP?

CDR. Fravor (01:47:13):

No.


Did the Tic Tac UAP move in such a way that defied the laws of physics?

CDR. Fravor (01:47:19):

The way we understand them, yes.


Many dismissed UAP reports as classified weapons testing by our own government, but in your experience as a pilot, does our government typically test advanced weapon systems right next to multimillion dollar jets without informing our pilots?

CDR. Fravor (01:47:38):

No, we have test ranges for that.


It took over 15 years for your encounter with the Tic-Tac to be declassified. Do you feel there was a good reason to prevent lawmakers from having access to this footage?

CDR. Fravor (01:47:50):

No, I just think it was ignored when it happened and it just sat somewhere in a file, it never got reported.


In a drawer… It happens a lot up here, shocker. Mr. Grusch, A couple of questions for you too, sir, this morning. What percentage of UAPs do you feel are adequately investigated by the US government, of the 5% that are reported?


I can only speak for my personal leadership over at NGA. I tried to look at every report that came through that I could triage.


Do you believe that officials at the highest levels of our national security apparatus have unlawfully withheld information from Congress and subverted our oversight authority?


There are certain elected leaders that had more information that, I’m not sure what they’ve shared with certain Gang of Eight members or et cetera, but certainly I would not be surprised.


Okay. You’ve stated that the government is in possession of potentially non-human spacecraft. Based on your experience and extensive conversations with experts, do you believe our government has made contact with intelligent extraterrestrials?


That’s something I can’t discuss in a public setting.


Okay, I can’t ask when you think this occurred. If you believe we have crashed craft, as stated earlier, do we have the bodies of the pilots who piloted this craft?


As I’ve stated publicly already in my NewsNation interview, biologics came with some of these recoveries, yeah.


Were they, I guess, human or non-human biologics?


Non-human, and that was the assessment of people with direct knowledge on the program I talked to that are currently still on the program.


And was this documented evidence, video, photos, eyewitness? How would that be determined?


The specific documentation I would have to talk to you in a skiff about.


Gotcha. Okay, and you may or may not be able to answer my last question and maybe we get into a skiff at the next hearing that we have, but who in the government either, what agency, sub-agency, what contractors, who should be called into the next hearing about UAPs, either in a public setting or even in a private setting? And you probably can’t name names, but what agencies or organizations, contractors, et cetera, do we need to call in to get these questions answered, whether it’s about funding, what programs are happening and what’s out there?


I can give you a specific cooperative and hostile witness list of specific individuals that were in those.


And 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. Now we have Mr. Langworthy’s here.

Speaker 3 (01:50:32):



Okay.

US Representative Nick Langworthy (01:50:40):

Thank you very much. I’d like to thank all of the witnesses for being here today to discuss this very unique topic, and I’d like to jump right into my questions, if you don’t mind. Commander Fravor, can you briefly describe your background?

CDR. Fravor (01:50:56):

Yeah, I was an enlisted Marine, Naval Academy graduate, in the Navy, flew for 18 years, got a master’s from University of Houston, and I’ve worked in the private sector for the last, what now, 16 years, 17 years. I do a lot of defense work.


Really gold-plated credentials. Commander Fravor, we’ve all seen the floating Tic Tac video that you engaged with on November 14th, 2004. Can you briefly talk about why you were off the coast of San Diego that day?

CDR. Fravor (01:51:29):

Yeah. We were at a workup with all the battle groups, so we integrate the ships with the carrier, the air wing with the carrier, and we start working. So we were doing an aerial defense to hone not only our skills, but those of the USS Princeton when they had been tracking them for two weeks. The problem was that there was never manned aircraft airborne when they were tracking them, and this was the first day, and unfortunately, we were the ones airborne and went and saw it.


Do you remember the weather that day? Was it cloudy or windy or anything out of the ordinary on the Pacific Coast?

CDR. Fravor (01:51:56):

It was actually, if you’re familiar with San Diego, it was a perfect day. Light winds, no white caps, clear skies, not a cloud. For flying, it was the best.


Now, is it true that you saw, in your words, a 40-foot flying Tic Tac shaped object?

CDR. Fravor (01:52:12):

That’s correct. Or for some people that can’t know what a Tic Tac is, it’s a giant flying propane tank.


Fair enough. Did this object come up on radar or interfere with your radar or the USS Princeton?

CDR. Fravor (01:52:25):

The Princeton tracked it. The Nimitz tracked it. The E2 tracked it. We never 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, it jammed the radar, spit the lock, and he’s rapidly switched over to the targeting pod, which you can do in the F-18.


From what you saw that day and what you’ve seen on video, did you see any source of propulsion from the flying object, including on any potential thermal scans from your aircraft?

CDR. Fravor (01:52:53):

No, there’s none. There’s no IR plume coming out. And Chad, who took the video, went through all the EO, which is black and white TV and the IR modes, and there’s no visual signs of propulsion. It’s just sitting in space at 20,000 feet.


In your career, have you ever seen a propulsion system that creates no thermal exhaust?

CDR. Fravor (01:53:10):

No.


Can you describe how the aircraft maneuvered?

CDR. Fravor (01:53:15):

Abruptly, very determinant. It knew exactly what it was doing, it was aware of our presence. And it had acceleration rates… I mean, it went from zero to matching our speed in no time at all.


Now, if the fastest plane on Earth was trying to do these maneuvers that you saw, would it be capable of doing that?

CDR. Fravor (01:53:35):

No, not even close.


And just to confirm, this object had no wings, correct?

CDR. Fravor (01:53:41):

No wings.


Now, was the aircraft that you were flying, was it armed?

CDR. Fravor (01:53:47):

No, I never felt threatened at all.


If the aircraft was armed, do you believe that your aircraft or any aircraft in possession of the United States could have shot the Tic Tac down?

CDR. Fravor (01:54:00):

I’d say no. Just on the performance, it would’ve just left in a split second.


It looks like that we have a problem here that needs further investigation.

CDR. Fravor (01:54:13):

Yes.


In your belief, is this flying Tic-Tac, I mean, is it capable of being the product of any other nation on the earth?

CDR. Fravor (01:54:27):

No, like I said earlier, I think it defies current material science and the ability to develop that much propulsion. And I know there’s been some physicists who have done calculations, which is beyond anything that we have.


Well, either the United States has an adversary here in this world that we don’t know or we really have some serious investigations to do. I really appreciate you being here. Is there anything else about the November 14th, 2004 incident that you think is important for this committee to know that you haven’t been asked here today?

CDR. Fravor (01:55:00):

No, it’s been said, it’s probably the most credible UFO sighting in history based on all the sensors that we’re tracking it and then for us to get visual. And to go against the naysayers, it’s something on the screen or whatever, I mean, there’s four sets of human eyeballs, we’re all very credible. Of the six of us that were involved in the thing, including the video, every one of us is going to do 20 plus years in the military in very responsible positions. So I’d say the world needs to know that. It’s not a joke.


Thank you very much for your testimony here today, for all of you. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.


Mr. Andy Ogles.

US Representative Andy Ogles (01:55:34):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for being here and the courage it took to come forward. And again, the sacrifice that each you have made. I serve on the National Security Subcommittee for the Financial Services Committee, so I really want to stay in the national security lane, if I may. So when we think about traditional adversaries and both us towards them and them towards us, we probe their capabilities, we look for weaknesses, and we collect that data, that reconnaissance, for in the event we need it in the future. For each of you, a yes or no question, based off of your own experience or the data that you’ve been privy to, is there any indication that these UAPs could be essentially collecting reconnaissance information? Mr. Graves?


Yes.


Mr. Grusch?


A fair assessment, yeah.


Mr. Fravor?

CDR. Fravor (01:56:28):

Very possible.


Again, in the national security vein, is it possible that these UAPs would be probing our capabilities, yes or no? Mr. Graves?


Yes.


Grusch?


Yes.


Fravor?

CDR. Fravor (01:56:39):

Definitely.


Is it possible that these UAPs are testing for vulnerabilities in our current systems?


Yes.


Yes.

CDR. Fravor (01:56:48):

Possible.


Do you feel, based off of your experience and the information that you’ve been privy to, that these UAPs provide an existential threat to the national security of the United States? Mr. Graves?


Potentially.


Yes, sir. Potentially.


The same answer, potentially.

CDR. Fravor (01:57:07):

I’d say definitely, potentially.


Mr. Graves and Fravor, in the event that your encounters had become hostile, would you have had the capability to defend yourself, your crew, your aircraft?


Absolutely not.


Sir?

CDR. Fravor (01:57:21):

No.


Based off of the information that you’ve been privy to, is there any indication that these UAPs are interested in our nuclear technology and capabilities?


Yes.


By external observation, sure. That could be a fair assessment, yeah.

CDR. Fravor (01:57:39):

Yes.


Is there any indication that Department of Energy is involved in UAP data collection and housing?


I don’t have an answer.


I can’t confirm or deny that in a public setting.

CDR. Fravor (01:57:51):

No-


Could you do it in a secure setting?


Yes.


Mr. Favor?

CDR. Fravor (01:57:57):

No, I don’t know.


Mr. Chairman, I think I’m the last member to go, but there clearly is a threat to the national security of the United States of America. As members of Congress, we have a responsibility to maintain oversight and be aware of these activities so that if appropriate we take action. I would encourage the Chairman to demand that we have any and all, but in particular Mr. Grusch, talk to us in a skiff, and if that access is denied, I will personally volunteer to initiate the Holman rule against any personnel or any program or any agency that denies access to Congress. Mr. Chairman, with that, I will yield the remainder of my time to my fellow colleague from Tennessee, Mr. Burchett.


Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you Mr. Ogles for the great questions, brother. Mr. Grusch, I might have asked this before, but I want to make sure, do you have any personal knowledge of someone who’s possibly been injured working on legacy UAP reverse engineering?


Yes.


Okay. How were they injured? Is it something like a radioactive type situation or something we didn’t understand? I’ve heard people talk about Havana syndrome type incidences. What was your recollection of that?


I can’t get into specifics, but you could imagine assessing an unknown unknown. There’s a lot of potentialities you can’t fully prepare for.


How do you think we ought to handle UAP whistleblower complaints like yours in the future?


Yeah, there was some issue with mine. So a PPD-19 process, it goes to the intel committees either through PPD-19 or ICD-120. There’s not a good way for the Intelligence Community Inspector General to provide that to other committees. And I asked my information to be sent to the House and Senate Armed Services Committee because there are Title 10 equities at play, but there was no smooth process to do so.


Yeah, it’s a trash can. Are you aware of any individuals that are participating in reverse engineering programs for non-terrestrial craft?


Personally, yes. Mm-hmm.


Do you know any that would be willing to testify if there were protections for them?


Certainly closed door, and assurances that breaking their NDA, they’re not going to get administratively punished for so. Yeah.


I yield, Mr. Chairman.


Thank you. I’m going to do something a little bit out of the ordinary here. We’re going to give three people a chance at an additional three minutes. So Mr. Burchett, do you want to keep going?


Why don’t you come back to me, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Luna, is she on that list?


I’m on [inaudible 02:01:01].


Sure.


Mr. Chairman, I’d like to submit for the record an article by NewsNation and it follows Mr. Grusch’s full interview for the record.


Without objection.


Thank you. Mr. Grusch, why is it that you refer to the phenomenon as non-human intelligence? Why deviate from the basis of extra terrestrial life?


I think the phenomenon is very complex, and I like to leave an open mind analytically to specific origin.


When you say specific origin, can you elaborate on that for those that might not-


If it’s a traditional extraterrestrial origin or something else that we don’t quite understand from either a biological or astrophysics perspective. Yeah, I just like the keep an open mind on what it could be, yeah.


Okay. And referring to your NewsNation interview, you had referenced specific treaties between governments, Article 3 of the Nuclear Arms Treaty with Russia identifies UAPs, it specifically mentions them. To your knowledge, are there safety measures in place with foreign governments or other superpowers to avoid an escalatory situation in the event that UAP malevolent event occurs?


Yeah. You’re referring to actual public treaty in the UN Register, it’s funny you mention that. Yeah, the agreement on measures to reduce the risk of outbreak of nuclear war signed in 1971, unclassified treaty publicly available, and if you cite the George Washington University National Security Archives, you will find the declassified in 2013 specific provisions in this specific red line flash message traffic with the specific codes pursuant to Article 3 and also Situation 2, which is in the previously classified NSA archive. What I would recommend, and I tried to get access, but I got a wall of silence at the White House, was the specific incidents when those message traffic was used. I think some scholarship on that would open the door to a further investigation using those publicly available information.


Thank you. And then my last question, with 51 seconds remaining. You mentioned white collar crimes potentially taking place in regards to a coverup. Can you please elaborate?


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


Thank you very much.


Yep.


Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time.


Okay. We’ll go to Mr. Raskin for three minutes.


Thanks, Mr. Chair. And I think the witnesses for their endurance and service today. Mr. Fravor, you’ve described your episode in detail now and you call it the most credible UFO sighting in history. I wonder, was this the first time that you encountered a UFO or a UAP in 2004?

CDR. Fravor (02:04:09):

Yes.


And what was your general attitude or perspective on the UFO discussion before that happened?

CDR. Fravor (02:04:21):

I never felt that we were alone with all the planets out there, but I wasn’t a UFO person. I wasn’t watching History Channel and MUFON and all that.


And have you had experiences or encounters since that happened?

CDR. Fravor (02:04:37):

No.


And so have you formed any general conclusions about what you think you experienced then?

CDR. Fravor (02:04:47):

Yes. I think what we experienced was, like I said, well beyond the material science and the capabilities that we had at the time, that we have currently or that we’re going to have in the next 10 to 20 years.


Very good. Mr. Grusch, you’ve been able to answer in great detail on certain questions and then other things you say you’re not able to respond to. Can you just explain where you’re drawing the line and what’s the basis for that?


Yeah, based on my DOPSR security review and what they’ve determined that is unclassified.


I see. So you’re answering any questions that just call upon your knowledge of unclassified questions, but anything that relates to classified matters you’re not commenting on in this context?


In an open session, but happy to participate in a closed session at the right level, yeah.


Okay. And Mr. Graves, you’ve said that there are dozens of fellow pilots, military pilots, are there also commercial pilots who’ve encountered the same kind of sightings that you described before?


They are similar. Commercial pilots have less range and less sensors to be able to reach out and look for objects over wide swaths of aerospace. And so pilots are seeing them, commercial pilots are seeing them, and they’re typically closer and the range of what they’re seeing is pretty large.


What is the most vivid concrete sighting with the naked eye of the objects that you described before the cube-like objects?


Certainly, I think the most vivid sighting of that would’ve been near midair that we had at the entrance to our working area. One of these objects was completely stationary at 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 the Eastern Seaboard. The two aircraft flew within about 50 feet of the object, and that was a very close visual sighting.


And you were in one of the aircraft?


I was not, I was there when the pilot landed. He canceled the mission after, and I was there. He was in the ready room with all his gear on with his mouth open, and I asked him what the problem was, and he said he almost hit one of those darn things.


He said he was 50 feet away from it?


Yes, sir.


And his description of the object was consistent with the description you gave us before?


A dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere.


Inside of a clear sphere?


Yes.


And with no self-evident propulsion system?


No wings, no IR energy coming off of the vehicle, nothing tethering it to the ground, and that was primarily what we were experiencing out there.


I’m over time. Thank you very much for your service, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.


Very good. Mr. Burchett?


Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is for all three of y’all, starting with Mr. Graves, why did you come forward on this issue?


I came forward because I 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 safety officer by the Navy, and this seemed… It just felt right. I felt like I had to help the folks that were still flying and dealing with this.


Mr. Grusch?


Purely a sense of duty. I first swore an oath when I was a cadet 18 years ago, and I still uphold that even out of uniform.


Commander?

CDR. Fravor (02:08:04):

I was pestered by a friend. And I asked, “Why?” And he said, “You’re the one person that they can’t discredit and you’ll add credibility to the New York Times article.” And so after about six times, I said, “Okay.”

Speaker 4 (02:08:17):

Honest.


Yeah. Yeah. This town isn’t made unfortunately by people like y’all. We thank y’all. And I do want to also thank the people in the audience and the people that are watching this, people all over the world that have kept this issue alive. You’ve endured criticism 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 appreciate you guys and gals. That’s why we need term limits. Y’all keep clapping, us politicians just keep talking. So let me ask y’all, how can the public contribute to UAP reporting, and what avenues do you think are available to the public to report these sightings? [inaudible 02:09:04].


Well right now I don’t think there is a lot of public options for the every man to be able to report on this. I think even for professionals that have sensor data that are seeing these on a regular basis, they’re still hesitant to come forward. And so for the general public, I think encouraging the conversations that we’re having today, looking for technology solutions that can be distributed so that objective data can be gathered is the first place to go.


Mr. Grusch?


I’ll just touch on the whistleblower side of it. I do encourage current and former military, the intelligence community and industry contractors to come forward in a legal way, either through the IC or DOD or whatever the cognizant IGs are to join me in this discussion.


Commander, and I guess I should say this for the record, my daddy was United States Marine Corps First Marine Division, so-

CDR. Fravor (02:09:54):

Oorah.


Yes, sir. He was old school, him and Chesty Puller on Peleliu, so thank you, brother.

CDR. Fravor (02:09:59):

Oh, wow. Wow.


Yes, sir.

(02:10:02):

I’m not anything like my daddy. He was incredible. I’m very mediocre, to say the least, but go ahead.

CDR. Fravor (02:10:07):

You seemed to be doing fine. For me, I was an accident investigator, so the biggest thing they learned, and I think that witnesses need to do is, one, don’t try and make the fish bigger than it was. Stick to the facts, write it down, and don’t speculate what you think it is because it will spoil your decision. Just write the facts down, we can get all the facts together and we can start to investigate and get a real honest story instead of, “It was this big.”


Thank you all. And I want to thank everybody, we made a history today. Mr. Chairman, I yield.


Thank you much. Mr. Garcia.


Thank you. I know now we’re going to be making some closing remarks, and so I just wanted to say a few things. First, to our witnesses, I want to thank all of you for being here with us today. I know that it takes a lot of courage. You’re telling really important information to this committee, and I just want to thank you, also for all three of your service to our country.

(02:10:59):

I also want to just note that today’s hearing was both important, but also serious, and I want to thank our subcommittee chairman, Mr. Grothman, I think for running a very fair and substantive hearing. I do want to thank the committee staff on both sides for the amount of work that it took to put this hearing in place, and certainly to all the members that have been involved in this issue prior to the hearing.

(02:11:23):

I also want to note for our witnesses and for the public that I’m a freshman member of Congress, and I’ve only been here for seven months, but this is by far the most bipartisan conversation and discussion that I have seen happen in the Congress, and I think that a topic of this significance as it relates to our national security, as it relates to information that we’re trying to gather for the American public, does bring people together, and I think that’s been really great to see.

(02:11:53):

I think it’s also important to note for the public, today in our hearing, we had on our side also both our full ranking member, which is Mr. Raskin and our vice ranking member, which is Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, both here at our hearing. I think it shows the importance and seriousness that our side of the aisle is taking to this important hearing, but also the broader issue as it relates to working with our Republican counterparts on this committee.

(02:12:19):

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 these hearings. Clearly, there’s a lot of information that we don’t know, but it’s also very clear that we have to continue our investigation and accountability on asking the right questions and ensuring that they’re part of the public record.

(02:12:39):

One thing that was important today is some folks might wonder, why are we asking questions that might already be out there or that have been asked before? It’s important that they’re asked and put into the public record as it relates to this committee, and so I want to thank you for answering some questions multiple times. I know, not just in maybe meetings you had with some members, but also here in the public.

(02:13:01):

Let me also just add an additional note, that it’s important also that our friends in the media and those that are not just reporting on this hearing, but that have reported on this topic and that may in the future, the media has an important role in this process, and it’s very important that the media engages, does independent investigation and reports on not just what happened today, but what they see independently around UAPs in the broader community. That is also an important public benefit that we have in trying to get the information and the facts as it relates to this.

(02:13:40):

Let me also just say finally that as a teacher and an educator and a longtime teacher and researcher, that I also really believe in following facts, in doing your homework and making sure that you follow science as we try to get the most information as possible, and so I want to thank you all for agreeing to do that today. Transparency is the cornerstone of government. We live in a vast galaxy. A lot of unanswered questions, and I thank you all for being here today. Mr. Chairman.


Thank you. I’d like to one more time thank Mr. Burchett, Ms. Luna, for bringing this to our attention. It’s a topic that has interested me since I was in school. It was a very illuminating hearing. Obviously, I think several of us are going to look forward to getting some answers in a more confidential setting. I assume some legislation will come out of this. I-

Speaker 5 (02:14:39):



Sure.


I apologize, Mr. Chairman. I need to compliment the folks in my office that did a lot of the work on this. Rachel and Noah sitting behind me here, they’re very quiet and humble, but without them, this thing would not have come off like it did, so I apologize.


Thank you. I think we’re going to want to look into what we can do to make more of this information public. I think there’s certainly a time period after which it should always be made public, and people have been concerned about these issues, like I said, since I was in high school. But in any event, I’d like to thank everybody who was here sticking through the entire hearing. Without objection, the members will have five legislative days to submit materials and to submit additional written questions for the witnesses, which will be forwarded to the witnesses for their response. If there’s no further business, without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned.

Speaker 6 (02:15:34):

Thank you.

House Holds Hearing on UFOs and Government Transparency Transcript

Other Related Transcripts

Stay updated.