John Greenewald: That's right, everybody. As always, thank you
so much for tuning in and taking this journey inside the black
vault with me. I'm your host, John Greenewald, Jr. And today's
a little bit of a short update, but also some thoughts as we
move forward here about the story of the UFO whistleblower,
David grush. Now I'm sure you've heard a lot of the media
stories, it's died down a little bit, since it first appeared a
couple of weeks ago. But there's some new developments that I
think are pretty cool. So I wanted to make this short update
video for you bring you that update. But also to kind of give
you some thoughts of where I'm at with it. If you couldn't tell
from the from the first video I dropped to today. Now, as you
can tell from that video, for those who did watch it, I'm
pretty skeptical about the claims. And it's not just
because I or anybody else who's skeptical about the claims,
wants to be a debunker and is pushing back on any good
development that has happened. Quite the opposite. When it
comes to me, you have to keep in mind for those who haven't been
around the field. For decades, I've been around this UFO stuff
for about 27 years. And in that time alone, I have seen numerous
high ranking either government or military officials, or
private corporation, but highly cleared when it came to
classification. Let's say from Lockheed Martin, a Boyd Bushman
comes to mind highly cleared individuals working on top
secret stuff irrefutable that they are, but have these
grandiose claims of even speaking with aliens, or having
photographs of aliens. Philip Corso is another one that has
come to mind, you know that, look, it's a book that will
forever live in infamy in this field. But really, our world
didn't change after he came out, he didn't really bring anything
with it. But for the price of his book, you can hear all about
a lot of his claims, and so on and so forth. And those are only
two off the top of my head. I mean, there's a lot more over
the years that have come forward, some with more
grandiose claims than others. So skepticism towards David grush
is not because it's David grush. And we want to, you know,
completely combat any type of claim that's made today. No,
it's rather based on a long history of people making these
types of claims. But saying, trust me, I have the proof, but
I can't show you. Now, David grush could have every good
intention in the world, and even believe what he's saying, I can
absolutely buy that. But whether or not he is being played, or
that he caught that he was being played, or he's misinterpreting
information, or whatever the case may be. Again, you don't
need to automatically label somebody a liar. They could
absolutely believe what they are telling you. But what they are
telling you is not necessarily the truth. So the skepticism, I
think is well deserved, again, for dealing with the big
picture, dealing with all of these claims that have come
around for decades. I think it's the right approach to treat this
with the same amount of skepticism as all the other ones
that have come forward, but sadly, fell flat on trying to
prove their grandiose claims to us. But that brings me to the
newest development which makes David Gratias story kind of
stick out compared to the rest whether or not it's true or not.
This is where it gets kind of cool. And now I'm kind of
popping the popcorn in the back in my kitchen there waiting for
what I hope is going to happen now. First, let me public, let
me publicize and give credit where it is due to the
journalist who broke this story, Matt Laszlo, and or Laszlo. I'm
sorry if I pronounced that incorrectly, Matt. But but all
credit to him for breaking this story just a couple of days ago
that Kirsten Gillibrand is organizing a hearing with David
grush. And possibly, along with other current and former
government officials, who seemed to cooperate crushes claims. Now
that makes grush automatically stick out from the rest, because
here we are with a hearing potentially getting grush in
front of the cameras in front of the Senate for a open hearing
available to the public. Again, as Matt reports here. jelibean
says they'll be open to the public if grush agrees to allow
cameras in. Now I'm a little surprised that that just simply
be because if you're giving, let's say whistleblower
protection or immunity, per se, to this person who's making the
claims, why is it their choice then to have cameras in the
room, I get it. Maybe they they get uncomfortable, maybe they
don't want to blast people's names in front of everybody,
that's fine, we can make certain stipulations. But we're talking
about not only grandiose claims, and I don't want to diminish
this, but but rather things that taxpayers paid for whether by
illegal funds or not, we are still putting the money into the
coffers, we have a right to know. And these are our elected
representatives who are going for this information, and going
to put grush under oath, put him in front of the committee, and
essentially have him tell his story. I don't believe that he
should have that choice. That's not to be offensive towards
grush at all, but rather, come on, let's This is ridiculous. We
shouldn't allow him to make the stipulations. If he wants to
make the claim. Let's make them he doesn't have to put
accusations on anybody. Those can absolutely be behind closed
doors. So he doesn't have to name names. But let's, you know,
either make up pseudo names or something. But I think the
public definitely has a right to know. So I'm a little surprised
to that maybe that's just protocol and procedure for for
experts that they're going to bring in. So fine, you know, it
is what it is. But my disagreement stands on whether
or not that should actually happen. But definitely check out
Matt's blog here and reporting I on his website, and I'll link
that in the show notes below. So you have that and you can
explore more in depth, he's actually written some more
stories since since this one, not going to go through all of
them. But again, full credit to him. He's the one that broke the
story. He's the one that deserves the credit. So make
sure you go check out his website, and in take a look at
this exclusive story that he wrote.
But I want to switch gears a little bit with that
development. So there's the update, right, I wanted to just
give you like, this is where we're at if if the Senate is
finally taking this seriously, and they're gonna put grush
under oath in front of their committee. That's great. And I
hope that it happens, right, I'm crossing my fingers. I hope that
the that the Senate will hear from grush. I hope that he
agrees to have cameras. And I hope we all hear a little bit
more about his story. But switching gears a little bit
here is the deepest part of my skepticism about Russia's
claims. And although I covered it a little bit in the first
video I did on this, I want to punch the note again with a
little bit more detail because I think it's deserving. And I
think that this can be applied to anybody who's essentially
bringing forward any other types of claims that are grandiose,
and nothing happens to them, meaning they don't get taken
away in cuffs for spilling security secrets or whatever. I
think that this is something that we have to take into
consideration all the time. And it's routed to the security
classification guide on Aeon UAP. And I believe that this is
going to be a key part in unraveling this mystery on what
truth there is behind grush. Now I hope that I am wrong. However,
this has bothered me since day one. So I'm going to explore it
a little deeper with you. Because I got a lot of questions
for my skepticism when it came to this as well. What and I had
brought up the the guide briefly but also the dotser approval for
grush being able to speak about all of his claims that he has
been with, with essentially clearance from the Department of
Defense and their arm called dotser. Now, quick refresher
dotser is the arm of the DoD that essentially reviews
information from former or potentially even current DOD
personnel that want to speak about something, but they are or
were a clearance holder and adopters job is to ensure that
nothing that they talk about no claim that they make no program
that they talk about, know anything encroaches into, to to
classify territory. But the key is, is that all they're looking
for they do not endorse the information and they do not fact
check the information. They ensure that no classified
information is within somebody's manuscript or book, television,
screenplay letter, speech, PowerPoint, presentation,
whatever. That's what they are, they're there for and they are
cleared at the top secret level and their protocols and
procedures allow them to look at what is being put in front of
them, review it and then make that determination. Once they
make that determination. They will put on their a stamped for
open publication. And that's it. Now part of brushes story was
that, as we are told, he did this. He took his information.
He took his claims he put them all on paper on what he was
going to say to apparently Leslie Kane, Ralph Blumenthal.
And later news nation, put them to dotser and said, Okay, I want
to talk about this. And he got the open clearance to do it. Now
in Leslie Kane and Ralph Blumenthal's article that was
published in the debrief. That was a point that was punched.
Why? Because it's interesting, because he got the clearance.
But when you dig a little bit deeper, the question should be,
why did he get the clearance? If so, if this stuff is completely,
highly classified at the most top secret level, entrenched
into Special Access Programs, and so on, and so forth, it
should have never passed dotser. And the biggest pushback on that
was two things. The first being doctors not cleared, they're not
high enough to be cleared. So they're not in the know. So to
them, it's all bunk. But in reality, they're just not read
into the program. Now, I'm sorry, that does not hold any
weight whatsoever to me, because again, their entire job is to
ensure that no classified information spills out into the
open. But that does not automatically mean that they
have to be read in to every single Special Access Program or
anything like that, in order to determine that because when
somebody puts information before them, I've never worked for
adopter never worked for the DoD despite those conspiracies about
me. However, I know enough to know that they're probably going
to do their due diligence to at least put some feelers out, take
that information. And even though they're not clear to
again, have carte blanche access to every special access program,
and government secret that that has existed, from the beginning
of the government itself, even though that might not be the
case, their policies and procedures are going to have
them take that information and extend to other arms of the DOD
to ensure that that information that may be more better served
asking department a or department B, hey, is this
classified material, they will do that. And in order for
department a or department B to look at it, they will DOPS or
sends it over. And they don't need to read anybody in all they
have to say is no, we are not clearing this, that goes back to
dots or dots or sees that it goes okay. It's not cleared. And
grush doesn't get his cleared for open publication stamp. Now,
I'm not showing the protocols here. But again, they have these
set procedures outlined because they have a specific mission and
has had that specific mission for quite some time. So the
whole well, they're just not cleared enough. Doesn't make any
sense whatsoever. Because how many times have they seen and I
don't have an answer to this. But how many times have they
seen information that they may not have been, quote unquote,
read in on but ultimately got denied? Okay, so that
information would be invaluable at this point. And we probably
will never know the answer because it's not cleared for
open publication. So we probably won't hear about that. But my
entire point is, is you can't argue the doctor isn't cleared
enough. So they just go ahead and stamp it for approval
anyway, because we'd probably since dotser has come around and
these review processes have been developed, we likely should have
seen maybe an accident or an oopsie by now. And I am not
aware of a single one. So I think based on that track
record, and please, if anybody knows one, meaning one of those
oopsies let me know. But given that reality that we haven't
seen that yet, my guess is the policies and procedures are
fairly strong, and they couldn't really verify anything was
classified. Okay, so that argument just doesn't stand with
me. The other argument that is often touted about grush is that
he can speak about this stuff, even though it's highly
secretive, and highly classified. Because he's giving
broad stroke details. He's not giving you a program name, or a
blueprint to the alien saucer, or the biological makeup of an
alien dead pilot as he described them, or whatever. So he's, he's
absent those classified details, but he can broad stroke talk
about it with no problem because that's not classified. That to
me is also a horrible argument. And to me that is easily also
dismissed. Now, that's where I now bring up the security
classification guide. When you talk about highly classified
programs, And you talk about these highly classified
programs. Without specific detail, they're still
classified. I have long used the stealth fighter example just to
kind of make it easy. Back in the day when the stealth fighter
was never known to the general public and the f1, seven team
was in development and even flying for however many years
that it was, you could not give broad stroke details about an
aircraft flying in the sky. That was essentially describing the
f1 17. And that's okay, you couldn't do that. Right.
I mean, there was leaks all the time to Aviation Week magazine
was notorious for getting these leaks about what was in
development. However, you still couldn't talk about that, even
again, in broad strokes. And it's because the details about a
classified program or classified piece of technology, the facts
surrounding whatever we are talking about, are classified in
themselves. Meaning it's inherently classified, meaning
you can't go around describing stealth technology before it was
acknowledged. And just because you didn't give the program name
it was involved in or the blueprint and chemical
composition of how it was made. That doesn't mean you can still
talk about it. And to prove that it's very easy, we can use the
security classification guide for UAP. Now, if you don't know
what this is, the security classification guide is
something that I had received back in, let me pull up the PDF
here. So we have it back in December of 2021. And this was a
big get for me, because this was the first time I'd ever been
released to the public. But it also proved what we kind of knew
already. But now it was definitive that there was a
guide on how to classify UAP, what was classified what wasn't
and what level of classification and UAP isn't the only thing
with a classification guide. There are many things with
classification guides. It defines the secrecy about
programs and or topics, in this case, UAP. Now, when you scroll
down, this is what I had received. And I have a whole
video on this. So please, if you're if you're curious about
this, make sure that you check out that video because I go into
much greater detail. But you can see that it was prepared in
April of 2020. It was approved by Scott Bray Yes, he's the one
that was at that first UAP hearing in front of Congress, he
was there with Ronald Moultrie. He approved it in April of 2020.
So this thing has been around for a while. And again, just a
nutshell, it This defines the secrecy behind UAP. Now you'll
see I'm not going to read it to you because again, that video
goes into much more detail. But this is what I want to focus in
on. These are essentially the definitions of what and what
isn't classified. And you'll see here that they're not blueprints
are not photographs are not anything but the facts
surrounding UAP. For example, the term UAP Well, we all know
it, it's not a classified term. So that is spelled out that the
classification is you or unclassified. One be the fact
that Navy pilots and other Department of Navy personnel
have witnessed and that certain do enter Department of Navy
technical systems have detected at unspecified times and places
UAPs. That fact considered unclassified. Another one, the
fact that the frequency of UAP sightings has increased in
recent years without any further information regarding when where
or how often sightings have been reported that fact,
unclassified, I'll read one more, the fact that Navy has an
ongoing effort to gain knowledge and insight into the nature and
origins of UAPs, as well as their operations, capabilities,
performance and or signatures. That fact, is unclassified. You
can see here that there's a couple more. The last one talks
about the task force mission, the fact that the task force
mission is to detect, analyze, catalogue, consolidate and
exploit non traditional aerospace vehicles slash UAP.
posing an operational threat to US national security and avoid
strategic surprise. That fact is unclassified. So again, you're
not seeing blueprints, photographs, videos, or anything
of great detail other than the facts surrounding what is and
you can tell by here, a highly classified issue within the
United States military. When you get past those few facts on the
first page that are all unclassified, you get to all of
this. Now, we don't know what is under all of this. We have a
header here, intelligence collection, exploitation,
analysis, and products underneath that, all redacted.
You can See, they're all national security reasons on why
it's redacted. Look, it even keeps going. Now, what does this
tell us? Even though we can't read what's under the black?
What does this tell us? Well, let me take it back to grush. If
anything that grush is claiming, like dead alien pilots, like,
captured non human craft, all of that is connected to UAP. Me he
used the term. That's that's just what the whole topic is all
about. So those facts, the realization that again, dead
pilots, alien craft, that we have all of this stuff,
wreckage, debris, all that kind of stuff. If that is true, it's
under this, it's under all this black, right? I don't think we
can all agree to that. That if what grush is saying, let's
let's get beyond the debate, if what are you saying it would be
under here, because the entire point of this guide in the
classified world is to define classification for UAP. So if
grush is telling the truth, that stuff would have to be here.
That's just how this works. And yet, all of it is redacted.
Ergo, it would be classified translation. dotser would never
let this fly. And since it was dealing with UAP, we could
probably deduce, the doctor went to a couple of different places,
since Grusha, claimed he was from the UAP task force, then
the Navy would likely be a place that they would extend out to
and say, Hey, we've got somebody who wants to talk about XYZ, and
the Navy would come back again, doesn't have to read Doppler
into anything. Obviously, arms of the DoD would be places that
they would extend out to and say, Hey, we've got a guy who
wants to talk about this, can you talk about this. And
obviously, he got the stamp of approval. Yet, all of this all
the other details other than the select few that I read to you.
And there's like one or two more that I skipped, but they're
pretty non exciting. We've known it for years. All unclassified,
everything else is classified. And I'm running into that
problem when dealing with UAP related requests that if I'm not
dealing with those few things, like pilots seeing something and
those very basic facts, everything is coming back
classified, yet grush was able to talk about this, this is a
huge problem for me, because you can't say look at this a proven
factual, irrefutable document, you can't look at this and
understand the true deep classification nature behind
UAP. And then turn around and look at Grusha go ha, I bet he's
totally fine to talk about all this, those things do not go
hand in hand. Now I can smell the third excuse that people are
gonna throw at me. When they hear that I am saying, hey,
look, this classification guy defines all secrecy that
everybody is left in the dark. Anybody who played a role into
this, which we do know as UAP taskforce members, I do believe
I know who wrote this. I don't think that that is public, yet.
I can't prove it yet. I am, too. I am 99.9% Sure I know who wrote
it. But I'm not gonna I'm not trying to play secrets here. I
can't prove it. So I'm not going to make the claim yet. But I
believe that I am close to doing so. However, there was another
UAP taskforce member who claims to have helped write this. That
was Travis Taylor. So he has openly said that I don't have
any documentation to back that up. I also don't have any reason
to dis, believe him. So fine. So Dr. Travis Taylor played a role
in making this. But we also don't know who else outside of
the task force may have been in charge of or overlooking this.
So that third excuse that I could just see the writing's on
the wall that people are gonna throw at me, well, all of them
are just in the dark, the UAP task force was not read in as
grush claimed. So Travis Taylor wouldn't know about all of that
he wouldn't put that information in the security guide, and so
on. But I don't have any type of example, in the history of
security classification guides, or anything like this, that I've
found yet anybody who has one send it on, where there are
multiple security classification guides, that security
classification guide is used at this level. But then there's
another security classification guide used at the top level that
deals with dead alien pilots and alien craft that we have in our
possession. I'm sorry, I don't I don't know of any nor do I think
that that is even that makes sense. So these types of excuses
to fall back on to kind of help crutch Gratias claims along,
they actually don't help in the long run at all, because it's
going against a documented historical fact about how all
these things work. And if people want to fall back on that and
say that is the first time in history that any of that has
ever happened. But I can absolutely see it happening.
Great, but you're gonna have to try and prove it somehow. And
that's the biggest problem that I have with crushes claims.
Again, it's not that he's making it all up, and he's some big fat
liar. No, he
could absolutely believe what he's telling you that he could
have absolutely heard from whomever he heard it from the
claims that he's stating. But look at all the evidence on what
kind of throws a monkey wrench into the wheel of this being
true. And I think that there's a lot going against it, which
again, is the root of my skepticism. But as we inch
closer, I hope anyway, to jello brands effort to get grush in
front of the Senate and in front of committees under oath. I
can't wait. Because I want to hear what he has to say. And I
understand he may not be able to name names in that setting.
That's not what I'm interested in. But if they give him that
ability to go under oath, and to essentially speak freely, and to
have that immunity, and the whistleblower language is solid,
and there's claims that grush played a role in helping write
that language. Okay, I mean, if that's true, again, little wonky
there that grush would be in the office, you know, helping but
fine. Okay, I mean, I'm not gonna I'm not gonna chastise it.
So if that's the case, and he wrote it, then then the language
here that's either coming or is already on the books should be
okay. For him to feel okay to speak. So I hope he doesn't have
a problem with cameras. I hope that he goes in front of
everybody. And that I hope that he tells everybody the reality
of what's going on. But in the end, this is what what kind of
worries me about the deepening of secrecy behind this, coupled
with the claim that dotser just signed off on it. No problem.
Yeah, David, you want to talk about this? Not a problem,
you're cleared for open publication, whatever. That
doesn't seem right to me. But I want to close this video with
one extra thought that nobody's really talking about. And I hope
that it becomes an outdated fact, in, that's in my video
now. But I hope it quickly becomes outdated because I want
this to change. What David grush had submitted to dotser is being
hidden from you. And I. Why is that? And I want to know, I
think that there's something there, I think that there are
going to be more questions to be asked. Now we do know about page
one that has been released. Just because they showed it on screen
to new at news nation. So on one of the pieces, they did kind of
a what I call it a graphic spread. And so they took the
documents and they you know, spread on like a fan and made a
graphic out of it. The only one you could see was page one. Now
that has been released that is out there. I know Mick West
actually contacted the network and got a clear graphic of it.
But that was it. They would not release any other page that they
got because it was not shown on screen. And it's not up to them
to release it. That's the best of how I understand that played
out. And that's totally understandable. I get it. So now
back to David grush. Why wouldn't he released this?
Obviously, the journalists saw it, I would hope anyway. But
they saw what he submitted to doctor and was cleared. I got
that impression from the reporting of Lesley Kane and
Ralph Blumenthal. So if they could see it, and news nation,
graphic artists could see it, the general public should see
it. And I think it's important to see exactly what David grush
submitted to dotser. Because if it has all of what he has
claimed in there, again, that doesn't completely endorse it
from the DOD. But at least we now have confirmation that what
was told to us was true. However, they're hiding it from
us. And that's what I don't understand. And I've asked, I've
reached out I've tagged him I've you know, I've said this a quite
a few times publicly already and other people are asking to Can't
you show the entire thing that David grush is cleared to talk
about, there's no reason not to show it. He's cleared. So what's
the issue? And I think that the bottom line will be there will
be more questions generated once we see it than answers deduced
from that document, and I don't get it. I I really don't. I have
a couple of ideas. But I don't I don't I don't really get it and
I do hope that they release it. So those are some final
thoughts. Who knows when the next update video on this UFO
whistleblower. Our story will be in normal congressional style.
I'm sure that hearing will be like seven years from now. But I
hope not. I hope it is something that they fast track. Of course,
I was being facetious there. Hopefully it will be something
somewhat relatively in the near future, because I think we all
deserve the right. We all have the right to know and we deserve
the truth about what the story is. I think we've heard enough
if there's congressional interest interest in the Senate
from senators and specifically, let's hear it, I'd love to hear
it. I'd love to see it. I want to see it happen, but I'm not
holding my breath. But we'll see. At the very least, let's
see that doctor paperwork. If you guys agree with me,
definitely. Right. Ralph Blumenthal, Leslie Kane, and
Ross Coltart Be nice, be respectful. But let them know
that you want to see that doctor paperwork to let's just put it
all on the table. Are there more tidbits of information that was
not released to us? Were there details that are being bantered
about in the media right now that we're not in the Doppler
play? I mean, again, there's a lot of different questions that
we can ask there. So why don't we just see it? And none of
these stories are ever black and white are easy? I never
understand that. But the question Stan, so again, I
stress please be respectful to all of them. If you do decide to
reach out but let them know, hey, let's see the doctor
paperwork. Let's get David grush. To publish it, we all
have a right to know. At least I think we do. If you like these
videos, please give a thumbs up. That's always a big help to me.
If you're listening on the podcast version, just know there
are always audio live or excuse me video live streams as well
just go to www dot the blackbaud.com/live make sure
you're subscribed to that YouTube channel. And on the
reverse. If you didn't know that I dropped a lot of these to the
audio podcast version, under the black vault radio on most of
your podcast streaming platforms like iTunes and Spotify and you
name it, it's on there. Just search for the black vault
radio, I take the videos, drop them to audio sometimes they're
not as fun because you can't see it but so many of you prefer
that even minus the visuals. So there you have it, both
resources are available to you. But again, please please leave
reviews if you can, no matter what platform that you are
looking at watching listening to or whatever. Thanks again for
that. This is John Greenewald Jr signing off. And until next
time, we'll see you then