DOPSR wouldn\u2019t approve a statement just to imply its validity. <\/p>\n
Anything that Grusch or Elizondo has cleared through DOPSR is information the government was comfortable with them sharing or publishing. This means that, to their knowledge, the claims are either untrue or not classified or sensitive.<\/p>\n
There\u2019s no double bluff involved.<\/p>\n
If any of Grusch’s submissions to DOPSR contained true or sensitive information\u2014like details about alien crash retrievals\u2014they would have firmly classified it. In such a case, he wouldn\u2019t even be allowed to disclose what was deemed off-limits.<\/p>\n
You can’t present a claim to DOPSR, such as \u201cwe have alien spacecraft at Wright Patterson Air Force Base,\u201d and then twist their denial of clearance into an implication of truth. If they refuse clearance, you can\u2019t publicly state, \u201cDOPSR didn\u2019t approve my claim about aliens at Wright Patterson, which must mean it\u2019s true.\u201d You would still be stating the very thing they flagged.<\/p>\n
There\u2019s no paradox here. Grusch and Elizondo approached DOPSR with their claims, and DOPSR responded, \u201cSure, go ahead and share that if you want.\u201d This indicates that the information isn\u2019t sensitive, likely because it lacks veracity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"