Latest on Grusch

By | September 14, 2023

Hi Everyone, 

There is a new treatment of David Grusch, which many of you have already mentioned, and I am linking below here. It’s nearly two hours long and forgive me for not doing a comprehensive discussion of it. Most of the video is not an interview with Grusch but interesting nonetheless. There is a good deal of Grusch here, too, however, and I think he comes across very well, very credible. 

It’s evident that Grusch knows a great, great deal, not just through his professional interaction with the subject, but I am thinking as a strong personal interest. 

I might return to this video in the future but for now it’s definitely worth our attention


Here is the video:


16 thoughts on “Latest on Grusch

  1. D.A.


    I only got 15 minutes into the video, and had to stop to say I agree it’s definitely worth our attention. I will likely make a lot of comments on this once I’m done watching it, but I have to say, coincidentally enough, I’ve already touched on some of the stuff he talked about so far in the AOA hypothesis timeline I had forwarded you.

    I think the interviewer should have pressed Grusch more in the beginning about his selection as liaison to the UAPTF, which I think is more important to the story than people might realize. The fact that Grusch decided to take on the job based on an email that was forwarded to his supervisor is only half the story. The other half of the story is that Jay Stratton (who was a charter member of the AOA) had selected Grusch for the job, but only after thoroughly vetting him for another reason–to investigate the alleged deep-state faction’s UFO Crash Retrieval and Reverse Engineering Program (CR&REP), which Stratton had investigated under AAWSAP. Interestingly enough, the UFO CR&REP investigation under the UAPTF was clearly done at Stratton’s sole discretion as the head of the UAPTF, because it was NOT part of the FY20 NDAA provision to stand up the UAPTF. He therefore took it upon himself to do it on his own, to pick up where he and his AAWSAP-BAASS cohorts left off nine years earlier. Hell, a UFO reverse engineering program wasn’t even on Congress’ radar until after Grusch’s PPD-19 whistle-blower compliant was brought to their attention in 2022.

    As I discussed in detail in my AOA hypothesis timeline, the likely reason why Stratton selected Grusch to investigate the UFO CR&REP was because it is likely being run by a deep-state faction within Air Force Intelligence Community (AFIC), and he needed somebody who could infiltrate their ranks, one of them, someone they could trust, someone like Grusch. It clearly worked because Crusch himself said that those who had come forward to talk to him were friends and colleagues of his (i.e., who were likely part of the AFIC, like Grusch). I also talk a lot about the shallow-state and deep-state UFO factions, in particular with regards to the Navy Intelligence Community (NIC) vs AFIC.

    In my hypothesis, I also speculate about people who I believe might have been backing the AOA and their UAP soft-disclosure initiative–people at a very high level within the Pentagon, who Grusch may have also alluded to in the video when he mentioned about being amazed at the level of the individuals (well known individuals) that he had talked to who were backing UAP disclosure. Someone from within the OCJCS or OSD is not out of the question for reasons I go into detail about. For the record, someone at Luis Elizondo’s level typically doesn’t send their letter of resignation to the SecDef. Just saying.

    As I mentioned to you in my email, the AOA timeline hypothesis is a living document, and I actually already added some more information to it regarding the Mosul orb, and more on my favorite bureaucrat, Sean Kirkpatrick. I will likely be adding some more to it soon, as well as amending some of the stuff I already have in it based on what else Grusch discusses in this rest of this interview, as well as what was discussed in today’s NASA briefing. I hope you do decide to take a look at my hypothesis. If nothing else, it contains a lot information to think about .


  2. OgronWaitress

    Richard, do you follow or know of the Behavior Panel on YT? I’m guessing you might as they’ve covered UFO testimonies before, a number of which they’ve passed as truthful. But recently after looking at Grusch they unanimously declared him a liar from his filmed interviews. I trust the BP pretty much (OK they were awful on the LHO press conference, almost suspiciously so) but I’m now in two minds about DG. I’d love to know your thoughts on their ‘debunking’ of him if you’ve seen it.

      1. OgronWaitress

        Here’s a link to that episode:
        These guys are top in their field and there was unanimity among them about deception around Grusch. This is using his body language and manner as cues, not so much what he’s saying so much as how he’s saying it and how his body tells a different story. It’s not a debunking in that sense.

  3. Fox_Mulder

    Hey Richard,

    I’m glad you came across this interview. Grusch comes across as very honest and credible. But I was even more impressed by the interviewer, Jesse. He really knows his stuff. He recently did an interview with Jacques Valle that I think you’d find very interesting (link below).

    Maybe you can have Jesse on your show sometime for a discussion. He’s a bright and well-read guy. Could be a good crossover.

    All the best.

  4. D.A.


    Unfortunately, after the first 15 minutes, the interview devolved into an almost Rathskeller-like conversation between two college classmates, who were waxing philosophic over a couple mugs of beer while trying to outdo each other in who could apply more arcane physics theories and references, which they had just learned in Dr. Gootblat’s quantum theory class, to why some men are attracted to blondes, while others…brunettes. I’m talking more, of course, about Michels than Grusch, who later politely called Michels out on it without him actually realizing it. Anyway, that 2-hour-long pontification in stand-up philosophy could have easily been distilled into less than a half hour with regards to actual useful information related to Grusch and the deep-state UFO crash retrieval and reverse engineering program (CR&REP). There…I said it. I suspect you wanted to say it too, but you were just being too polite, so I said it for you.

    To be frank, Michels at times came off as a pretentious Cliff Clavin version of Bill Nye, who wanted to hear himself talk more than the interviewee, only to contradict his own meandering opinions on several occasions. Don’t get me wrong, it was an interesting conversation from a philosophical sense, and I understand it is Michel’s YouTube channel, but nonetheless it left me feeling disappointed because Michels is not an astute interviewer, and was clearly more interested in trying making himself look as smart as Grusch. Grusch’s time would have been better off spent with you or Joe Rogan, because Michels was in a position that most interviewers could only dream about, but dropped the ball entirely. There are so many good questions, and follow-up questions, he could have asked Grusch, but simply didn’t. Of course, maybe he did ask a lot of good questions, which Grusch simply couldn’t answer, so he cut those segments out and then filled in the gaps with speculation and stand-up philosophy. There are ways, however, that one can ask a question in order to extract a tacit answer from a reluctant interviewee, or at least extract an answer in which the listener can infer the answer, like what the House Committee members did at the last hearing, the nuance of which was apparently lost on Michels.

    Furthermore, with regards to the UFOs’ origins, most of what was discussed was philosophical conjecture and speculation on both Michels’ as well as Grusch’s part, which on the one hand I found interesting, but on the other hand, I found extremely disappointing because it led me to believe that Grusch either wasn’t told everything by those who had come forward to him about the CR&REP, or perhaps those in the CR&REP do not know themselves, or Grusch was in fact fed a bunch of information as part of a PSYOP, because if he had been given more information about the crafts and bodies, then he would have been less speculative, and more specific, in his opinions, like Lazar was about his work at S-4, because Grusch would have had some context, or available baseline data, to formulate one or more cogent hypotheses around, instead of meandering all over the ufology spectrum with Michels, like virtually everyone else does, who has no inside information. Of course, he may have been just following Michels lead to be circumspect about what he actually did know, but still…

    Their speculation regarding ET, ranged from them being non-human entities from other planets, to being human time travelers from the future, to being synthetic biologics, to being higher dimensional beings; all of which can technically be part of the equation—as discussed ad nauseam by almost everyone else and their grandmother for the last 50 years—but all cannot apply to what the insiders told Grusch about what they know, and have parked in an AF hanger. They also speculated about such things as ET purposely leaving behind some vehicles in order to study our ability to figure them out, about human time-travelers avoiding the grand-father paradox to justify the Fermi paradox, about ET being interested in our nuclear technology, about ET coming to us in a familiar humanoid form so that we can relate to them, etc., etc., etc., without addressing the numerous contradictions each theory might present to one of the other theories, as well as to aspects of the individual theories themselves, and aspects of some historical accounts. For example, Michels appears to be a firm believer that ET (as in all) are humans from the future, who are avoiding contact with us in order not to affect their timeline (i.e., the grand-father paradox), yet here we are talking about the very fact that they’ve been interacting with us for quite possibly millennia, and have some of their vehicles parked in a hangar right now to prove it—at least according to Grusch and Lazar and Wilson. The list of incongruities goes on and on.

    They did, however, bring up some interesting points to consider in addition to what I previously stated, but overall by the 1:52:24 mark in the video, I felt like I knew little more about what Grusch had investigated than I did at the 0:15:00 mark, outside of a couple of exceptions, which are worth noting, and which I will be adding to my AOA timeline. One interesting point in particular–though it appeared to possibly be based on as much speculation on Grusch’s part as fact–is the possibility that the UFO CR&REP classification process is based on a DOE SCG and not a DOD SCG (based on the program’s roots with the Manhattan project and using the crafts’ sources of energy as justification for classification); meaning that the UFO CR&REP might technically be classified by the DOE, which would make the DOD classification and declassification paper trail within the MIC (or more specifically, the AFIC) that much harder for anyone to trace. Furthermore, Grusch alluded to a possible reason as to why some people may not have been prosecuted for possibly violating their NDAs in the past, and that is for a similar reason as to why Knapp brought Bob Lazar out from Dennis’ shadow and into the public spotlight—indicting someone on charges that they violated their NDA by leaking classified information to the public, would only legitimize the information they leaked, making it a catch 22 in the purest sense; however, in the world of derivative classification, there are lots ways around that, which the USG would have at their disposal.

    Another interesting point, which again Michels did not follow up on, was that he asked Grusch point blank about Bob Lazar, who Grusch stated that he honestly didn’t “know” if he was legit or not. And there’s the rub, which Michels didn’t follow up on. I cannot definitively state that I “know” UFOs are real either, but I can certainly infer they are real based on circumstantial evidence, otherwise I would not have joined your site. I also don’t “know” if Bob Lazar is legit, but I certainly “believe” he is for too many reasons to elucidate here; therefore, I find it hard to believe that Grusch would be completely devoid of any opinion on Lazar—whether that opinion was formulated prior to his investigation or afterwards—unless he never heard of Lazar, which I find very hard to believe, especially given Grusch’s friendship with Knapp, who Grusch had sought out in 2022 at the SCU after filing his PPD-19 and getting DOPSR approval to go public! Putting Stratton’s relationship with both Grusch and Knapp aside (which would have likely brought the two together at some point anyway), why would Grusch purposely seek out Knapp right after getting DOPSR approval if it weren’t to talk about going public, like Knapp famously did with Lazar? There is only one reason why he would seek out Knapp, and that creates a disconnect with his answer about Lazar, which Michels didn’t followup on because he was too busy trying to impress Grusch with the fact he knew what Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle was.

    I suspect that given Grusch’s limitations with respect to discussing classified information, and/or aspects of his PPD-19 whistle-blower claim, he couched his Lazar answer as “I don’t know”, which is akin to saying “I can neither confirm nor deny”, because if he had said he did “know” or “believed” Lazar was legit, then he would be verifying Lazar’s claims based on corroborating testimony and evidence provided to him by the CR&REP whistleblowers, which in turn discloses classified information. And as anyone who has ever taken DOD derivative classification training knows, ANY information that when combined with other information can be used to deduce classified information, then those pieces of information when combined, or used in context to one another, is considered classified as well. If the whistleblowers told Grusch information that totally contradicted Lazar’s testimony, then he could have easily said “no I don’t believe Lazar was legit”, which would not have violated any NDAs involving classified information, but he didn’t say that, which in itself might be telling. So instead, he said “I don’t ‘know’”, which is tantamount to “I can neither confirm nor deny”. Michels should have followed up Grusch’s reply by pressing him on whether or not he “believed” Lazar’s story was true based on what the whistleblowers told him. If their story didn’t match Lazar’s claims or flat out contradicted Lazar, then Grusch could have simply stated that fact because it wouldn’t divulge any classified information, regardless of whether Lazar’s claims were true or not. However, if their story did match Lazar’s, then Grusch would be forced to repeat that he didn’t “know”. Of course, given that Grusch was not under oath, he could have simply lied his way out of such a question, but we’ll never know either way, because Michels never asked the right questions.

    Overall, it was not a very good interview in my opinion, which ultimately left me with more questions than answers. Just my humble opinion.


    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      Great points and I agree about Michels. I really like your comment regarding the possibility that the UFO CR&REP classification process is based on a Department of Energy Special Compartmented Information (SCI) control system, rather than a Department of Defense one. This would make the paper trail within the military-industrial complex harder to trace.

      1. D.A.


        Another interesting thing to point out is that if the UFO CR&REP had its start with Sarbacher and Oppenheimer, and the Manhattan Project, as Grusch suggested, then it might cast a shadow over the validity of MJ-12 documents since neither individual was listed as one of the founding members of MJ-12–at least not as far as I am aware. If true, could that possibly mean that the whole MJ-12 theory was based on planted misinformation as a diversion from the real originators of the UFO CR&REP? Or does it represent a potential kink in Grusch’s armor? It would be interesting to delve more into the history of the Manhattan project, Oppenheimer, and Sarbacher, immediately after the war to see if any connections arise.


        1. Richard Dolan Post author

          I have wondered about this over the years. In V2 of UFOs and the National Security State, I raised this very possibility in my Chapter “The Empire Strikes Back,” which I named for that very reason. To be honest, I have gone back and forth about those documents that I just don’t know. I do still place general confidence in the followup “Majestic” documents curated by Robert and Ryan Wood. Just my view.

  5. SeeingDots

    What I found suspect is that when asked what happened with the plan to brief congress in the SCIF, Grusch said he wasn’t extended clearance again so he could do it. There wasn’t focus on this at all. Everything hinged on this and both the interviewer and Grusch effectively shoulder shrugged like it wasn’t a big deal and no one seemed upset by it. The interviewer also didn’t dig into it. Congress didn’t dig into it or raise hell about it. This reaction to being stopped at the 1 yard line like this given what Grusch said he and his family went through to get this far (according to him) isn’t normal. Same for congress. None of this computes.

    Here’s a theory:

    If we are undergoing a secrecy facelift as Richard puts it (smart theory, in my opinion), the cabal would need a catalyst to to get this going – someone to identify leakers then testify to congress, for example. Would you want a wildcard doing that or someone you control? Who better to serve this role than Grusch who is former Intelligence? They’d plan it such that he’d interview key people to identify leakers and then offer to provide a classified briefing to Congress (to be appear pro-disclosure). Only, the Pentagon plays the part of bad guy to thwart it by denying an extension of his clearance. Grusch passes on the list of leakers to the security apparatus to be silenced or it’s taken from him (NSA sees all). Grusch can be an unwitting accomplice or an active participant in this theory.

    NASA is asked to look into UAP but that’s likewise set up to fail – e.g., no access to classified data, prior NASA data is deemed to have inadequate “resolution”, funding to the new “UAP Research” center isn’t even disclosed because it’s likely meager. They also appoint someone to direct said center who is accustomed to coordinating with the Pentagon. In this way, he knows what not to disclose, how to spin data, etc. NASA wouldn’t want the public to know who this person is because they don’t want his past affiliations with the Pentagon to be known but eventually must cave due to public pressure.

    Most recently, the ICIG just claimed in a letter to Burchett that they never received any info regarding UAPs nor conducted any reviews or investigations into the topic. Grusch said he provided his investigation results to ICIG and that they conducted their own independent investigation which yielded the same results. Either ICIG is lying or Grusch is lying. See Burchett’s recent tweets for ICIG’s formal letter.

    Sometimes it’s helpful to identify motivations by examining the results. What resulted from Grusch’s investigation and testimony to Congress?

    1. Leakers were identified (NSA sees and hears all)
    2. Zero classified information was divulged, not even to Congress
    3. NASA put up their “We got this” veneer and disclosed nothing
    4. Congress has their “We got this” moment designed to go nowhere
    5. The Pentagon likewise put up their “We got this” veneer with a spiffy new AARO website and maybe even a new reporting structure for pilots to disclose their sightings to a black hole.

    Richard, I know you don’t like the it’s-an-op theory but you have to admit that it’s plausible. Grusch could be in on it or a pawn.

    I admit that it’s also possible that Grusch is a noble white knight that was simply met with a more sophisticated and well coordinated secrecy apparatus.

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      This is really insightful. I don’t know if you are correct here or not, but from my perspective you could be right on the money. Lots to think about. It’s very strange that no one is commenting on the lack of followup — as you point out — between Grusch and members of Congress. Thanks for your comment.

    2. itsmeRitaC

      Seeing Dots, i have not seen your name before, but i like the way you analyze this so called disclosure and a few of your points i have thought about myself. 🙂 Thank you for sharing! I am about 80% certain you are correct.

      Did you know that Knapp and Corbel ‘accidentally’ met Grusch at a star trek convention in Vegas a couple of years ago? 🙂

      The ufo community often makes me feel quite sad. I hate to say it but there is a gullibility factor that has been a surprise for me.

      I have thought of Grusch being an unwitting pawn all along. And we also know how much these intel agencies have about everyone among themselves and that is just baked into that cult. He always struck me as very vulnerable to that and what little we saw from public record via the Intercept was nothing. Yet the usual ‘ufo journalists’ , the ‘official’ ones, jumped on it like it was a big deal. I considered that to be part of the ‘op’. Yes, i don’t think anything here has been for real. Except a handful of congress people who have zero power.

      1. Torin

        Hi Rita
        If Grusch was just a tool and fed garbage then what do we consider of the hundreds or thousands of stories that are just as uncanny and far-fetched given by all the military and others going back decades. Going back millennia!
        What about Richard’s life work and books?!
        That’s what I can’t comprehend. Why is nobody addressing that in their dissertations?
        . So frustrating.


    When things get a little too serious, it’s time to get funny. I think that this hilarious interview by JP of “Wake Up With JP” contains as much or more truth than Ross Coulthart’s interview with David Grusch. Can you spot the TruthBombs?

Leave a Reply