[ad_1]
- Newly released internal DoD memos shed light on security concerns and chronicle chain of events in the days and weeks that followed Luis Elizondo’s resignation and UAP videos were published by the NY Times in December 2017
- Despite public statements by the Pentagon asserting Luis Elizondo had no assigned role on AATIP in June 2019, these memos show the DoD had made that determination back in late December of 2017 but for an unknown reason did not make it public
- Details emerge in these documents that outline the security concerns and overall reasoning that led to the AFOSI investigation into the 2017/2018 leaks of three UAP videos
- Handwritten notes, likely made by former Secretary of Defense James Mattis, express concern over Luis Elizondo’s resignation and “sudden departure” from the DoD asking if it was a “counter-intelligence alarm?”
- A new, never-before-made-public, resignation letter submitted by Luis Elizondo surfaces; 2nd previously already-made-public resignation letter said to have “uncertain provenance” and never delivered to Secretary of Defense
Scroll down for article…
Subscribe to The Black Vault’s YouTube Channel for a
video breakdown of this story and an exploration of the documents themselves.
Begins TODAY at 3:00pm Pacific / 6:00pm Eastern.
Newly released documents from the Department of Defense (DoD) shed new light on the story of Luis Elizondo, the man who has publicly claimed leadership of the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) while studying UFOs. The documents date from late December 2017 and offer a compelling glimpse into the internal concerns of the DoD about Elizondo saying on television that humanity “…may not be alone,” all while talking about his role studying UFOs within the DoD as the director of AATIP.
One of the documents, obtained by The Black Vault through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), is a “memorandum for record” written by Garry Reid, the then-Director for Defense Intelligence, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (OUSD(I)). In this document, Reid calls into question Elizondo’s role within AATIP, asserting that Elizondo had “aggrandized his role” in the program. Further to that, it was stated, “To the best of [Reid’s] knowledge, [Elizondo] had no job responsibilities related to the AATIP.”
These assertions provide a stark contrast to Elizondo’s public claims of his involvement that was being reported by the mainstream media. These records prove that within a week of the NY Times publishing their article on December 16, 2017, which showcased Elizondo, and also published two of the three now infamous UAP videos; the DoD internally was already questioning Elizondo’s involvement and exact role in the program.
This stance on Elizondo well predates the Pentagon’s controversial public statement by spokesperson Christopher Sherwood first published in June of 2019 by The Intercept denying his role within AATIP. In that article, it was said by Sherwood speaking on behalf of the Pentagon that Elizondo, “… had no responsibilities with regard to the AATIP program while he worked in OUSDI [the Office of Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence], up until the time he resigned effective 10/4/2017.” (Note: This was later changed to, “… no assigned responsibilities…”)
But Elizondo’s “aggrandized” claims regarding his role within AATIP were not the only thing the Pentagon was documenting and concerned about in late December 2017. The fact that the NY Times had obtained and published two UAP videos (the third wouldn’t be published until March 2018) became an even bigger potential national security risk, because based on the evidence the Pentagon had at the time, they feared classified information had officially leaked and was published by one of the biggest newspapers in the world.
The Leak of Three UAP Videos Sparks Security Concerns
The memo also raises concerns about the handling of classified information, indicating a level of worry within the DoD about potential leaks tied to Elizondo. That fear began on October 12, 2017, when Reid learned of the To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science (TTSA) press-less press conference in which Elizondo appeared as the organization’s new Director of Global Security & Special Programs just one week after his DoD resignation. Elizondo had stated in this press conference that TTSA was, “… planning to provide never-before-released footage from real U.S. government systems. Not blurry amateur photos but real data and real videos.”
This statement was clearly a concern internally for the DoD, so Reid quickly contacted the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI), “…which is responsible for providing investigative support to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD),” to explore any potential reason for investigation. AFOSI determined at that time, that there were no “tangible indicators” of possible misconduct, and they did not have enough information to open a case on Elizondo.
But, that all changed two months later on December 7, 2017, when the NY Times contacted the DoD regarding AATIP and Elizondo. Based on what the NY Times submitted, OUSD(I)’s Security Officer was notified on December 15, 2017, that Elizondo may have “misused government systems” and “may intend to release [U.S. government] footage or information that he obtained during his employment with OUSD(I)”. It is unknown based on these memos what exactly the NY Times submitted that sparked that concern.
On December 16, 2017, The New York Times posted their article, “Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program” which received worldwide attention. Embedded within this page were two videos of alleged UAP referred to as the “Gimbal” and “FLIR1“. Both held the caption that they were, “… released by the Defense Department’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program” and were, “Courtesy of U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE”. Simultaneously, both videos were published on the YouTube page of Elizondo’s new employer, TTSA.
On December 18, 2017, OUSD(I) then discovered a classified email sent by Elizondo to a “Navy civilian” in August 2017 requesting “assistance” to get one or more videos “declassified.” The videos attached to that email were the same that had begun circulating the media, so on December 21, Reid met with AFOSI agents, “… to initiate a formal inquiry into Mr. Elizondo’s possible mishandling of classified materials.”
We know from documents already released that AFOSI conducted that investigation and concluded it in April 2018. And although Elizondo’s name was redacted, it was clear it included details about his actions while at the DoD, and the circumstances on how the FLIR1 and Gimbal videos got out to the public.
In the end, AFOSI concluded the videos were unclassified, so the matter was closed. However, during the course of their investigation, it was noted that Elizondo only asked for the videos to be used for “internal use only” to be included in a database tracking “unmanned aerial vehicles (balloons, commercial UAVs, private drones such as quadcopters, etc.)”. Elizondo did not request any usage outside of the government or for the mainstream media. AFOSI determined that the release authority reviewing the videos in the Navy, “…would not have approved the videos for release to the media,” if they were notified of that intent.
This entire narrative which unfolded from the time of the TTSA press conference, through to the end of the AFOSI investigation, is completely contradicted by Elizondo’s January 2021 recorded interview with The Black Vault.
Despite saying in October 2021 that TTSA was, “…planning to provide never-before-released footage from real U.S. government systems,” Elizondo told The Black Vault he was “very surprised” TTSA had the videos, and further stated he would have been “more hesitant” to release them as he intended them only for “official use only” when he was working for the DoD. He also stated he was “not aware” the videos were going to be published, and found out when the NY Times published their article on December 16, 2017.
This week, The Black Vault reached out to Elizondo’s attorney Mr. Todd McMurtry who handles questions on Elizondo’s behalf. He was asked about the discrepancies in regards to the videos (full list of questions submitted below), and their release to the public, but McMurtry stated in an email, “… [Elizondo] believes he has already answered these questions repeatedly and will stand by his prior public statements.” He added, “As a reminder, you are aware of the fact that Mr. Elizondo was cleared of any wrongdoing by an official AFOSI investigation in 2019.”
Although the conclusion of the AFOSI investigation does not mention anything about being cleared of “wrongdoing,” it should be stated that no formal charges or allegations are known to have been made against Elizondo after the investigation.
However, even more confusion surfaces when adding in the version of events as told by Christopher Mellon, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations and close colleague of Elizondo. Mellon stated in Barcelona, Spain, at the UFOlogy World Congress that, “It’s been from troublemakers and activists like Lue and me. We snuck these videos out and I took them to the NY Times.” In addition to that, Mellon told James Fox for his 2020 documentary “The Phenomenon”, “I received the videos, and now famous videos, in the Pentagon parking lot from a Defense Department official. I still have the packaging. This is the case where somebody bent the rules a little bit…”
That packaging (along with other AATIP related documents) was found in 2018 on Mellon’s webserver in an open/unsecure directory by “Twitter User Jay” who now runs the blog “The Mind Sublime“.
That packaging had Elizondo’s name written directly on it, along with the date and time Mellon received them.
The Black Vault reached out to Mellon (full list of questions submitted below) to ask about this packaging, and the contradictions within the testimony regarding the events leading up to the publishing of the UAP videos. Mellon said in an email, “I appreciate your efforts to bring credit to the brave individual who provided me the famous unclassified DoD UAP videos.” He went on to state, “However, I am compelled to honor their request for privacy. In due time hopefully that individual will receive the credit they richly deserve for helping our nation overcome a glaring intelligence failure and an unfortunate and misplaced prejudice against the legitimate and vitally important UAP issue.”
It should be noted, no question was asked seeking the identity of who leaked the material to Mellon. The questions were only regarding the discrepancy of the stories being told to the public by Elizondo and Mellon; the packaging found on Mellon’s webserver with Elizondo’s name on them; and asking for clarity on Elizondo’s role specifically when it came to the videos coming out of the Pentagon.
A follow-up was sent by The Black Vault, clarifying that the identity of the leaker was not the intent of seeking answers for this article, but rather, it was instead asked, at the very least, if Mellon could “deny Mr. Elizondo’s involvement” to clear up the confusion? That email has yet to receive a response as of the publishing of this article.
Did Secretary of Defense James Mattis Himself Express Concern Over Elizondo?
Also in this new FOIA release was an identical copy of Reid’s “memorandum for record” that was outlined above, however this version had handwritten notes in the margin highlighting key concerns and questions over what Reid had documented about Elizondo and the media’s portrayal of the AATIP saga.
The handwritten notes are believed to have been made by Secretary of Defense James N. Mattis. It is unclear why he reviewed the “memorandum of record” or if he reviewed all of them written by senior officials by default, however, you can find his initials with the date “12/23” at the top of the document indicating the date of receipt and review by Mattis.
In addition, handwriting comparisons of confirmed documents written by Mattis to the writing in the memo in question, offers numerous matches in writing style to indicate all were written by the same person.
The Black Vault reached out to General Mattis to confirm his handwriting, and to ask additional details about the chain of events, however no response was received.
Regardless of if the notes were written by Mattis, it’s clear that Reid’s memorandum sparked concern from a senior official of some kind within the department. And what may be, arguably, the most direct concern over Elizondo’s resignation indicated by the handwritten notes was the notation “C-Intell Alarm?” or counter-intelligence alarm with a question mark. A sudden departure by someone who was highly cleared and who possessed numerous national security related secrets, likely worried a few upper brass within the DoD wondering where they could be going next, or what may have sparked their “sudden departure.”
Another Resignation Letter Surfaces
Another interesting discovery within this FOIA release is the discovery of a second resignation letter by Elizondo that had not been publicly acknowledged or seen before. The letter, received by Elizondo’s direct supervisor John Garrity III on October 3, 2017, is simple and straightforward. It reads:
This letter is strikingly different in both formatting and messaging from the other resignation letter that was already released by the History Channel TV show “Unidentified” in which Elizondo had a starring role, and that was also found on Mellon’s web server along with the disc’s packaging referenced earlier in this article. Mellon was asked why he had a copy of that version of his resignation letter and what he felt about the surfacing of a second resignation letter that lacked any reason for Elizondo’s resignation, but he did not answer directly any question submitted.
Despite Mellon’s unwillingness to address those issues, Elizondo’s attorney clarified why there were two resignation letters: “[Elizondo’s] memorandum of resignation directed to John Garrity was simply an official notification to his direct supervisor. His resignation letter to the Secretary of Defense and the DoD was his explanation as to why he was resigning and expressing his concerns with the bureaucratic challenges and other issues that created hurdles for the investigation of UAP, which present national security concerns.”
Although it could be the case that Elizondo was simply notifying his direct supervisor with the first letter, one strange revelation came to light in Reid’s memo. What is now known to be the second resignation letter, the one that has been public since 2018, it was said to have an “uncertain provenance.”
Elizondo was asked to clarify what these unusual circumstances were that got the second letter to be labeled as having “uncertain provenance”, and whether or not he or someone else delivered it like it was said he did with the first letter, but no answer was given. Instead, McMurtry passed on a broad statement plugging Elizondo’s book for future purchase. He said, “As for the remainder of your questions, Mr. Elizondo will be addressing many of these points in his upcoming book and prefers to rely upon that writing rather than creating a separate account through this response.” The release date of that book remains unknown, and William Morrow/HarperCollins did not respond to emails asking for an updated publication date.
Response to the Secretary of Defense Directly
The third document released in this FOIA drop was another memo from Reid and was addressed to the Secretary of Defense. It responds to six questions submitted to Reid, all of which were generated after reading the initial memorandum this article covered above. The fact that this memo was one for the Secretary of Defense, rather than just for the “record” like the first, supports further that the handwriting and subsequent line of questioning was likely from Mattis himself.
The first question asked was why Elizondo had such an abrupt resignation. The answer by Reid expanded on the fact that Elizondo gave three different reasons for his resignation which had caused further concern to the DoD. One reason was given to his direct supervisor (Garrity) on October 3, 2017, in which he mentioned he had “a fleeting job opportunity that required his immediate availability.” On or around October 4, 2017, in the second resignation letter, Elizondo cited concerns about the DoD’s inaction regarding “anomalous aerial threats”. On October 6, 2017, Elizondo told Reid over the telephone that he resigned because the job was too stressful on his family.
Another question asked was regarding the “uncertain provenance” about the second resignation letter. Reid addressed this by stating that the first resignation letter was “hand delivered” “personally” by Elizondo to his supervisor. However, the second resignation letter was delivered to the OUSD(I) Chief of Staff office by “someone other than Elizondo” on around October 4, 2017. Elizondo was asked to clarify, but did not address this question directly.
This section also noted that Reid contacted at least “two senior officials that have knowledge of special programs” to verify the claims Elizondo was making about “secretly working for the Secretary”, however, despite these efforts, the OUSD(I)’s assessment was that “Mr. Elizondo’s claims were not credible”. As a result, the DoD did not consider the letter “worthy” of Mattis’ attention, and did not deliver it up the chain once it was received.
“But It’s Garry Reid”
There will be no doubt that many will question the accuracy of these memos due to the fact that they were written by Reid.
Reid, who has become somewhat of a villain in the UFO community over the course of the last year, is largely blamed for the problems Elizondo has encountered, whether justified or not.
Elizondo has directly blamed Reid for “coaching” Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough, who he claims often gives out “inaccuracies” about him.
“Last I heard, [Garry Reid] was coaching Pentagon Spokesperson, Susan Gough how to respond to inquiries by the media about me. This would explain the obvious inaccuracies provided to the media about me by Ms. Gough,” Elizondo told the online blog Liberation Times in April 2022.
That same month, Elizondo told The Debrief, “[Reid] was one of the biggest obstacles to the DoD’s investigations and public transparency of unidentified aerial phenomena.”
Elizondo filed a DoD/IG complaint against Reid and two others (Gough and Neill Tipton) in March 2021, alleging that all three, “Conducted retribution, and provided false information to the public.” Elizondo also said that the three individuals were, “Abusing goverment (sic) authority,” and participated in Illigal (sic) destruction of information.”
Elizondo went on in the complaint to allege that, “… Reid was clearly upset with me and indicated that he wanted to see me in his office. He also said that he would ‘tell people you are crazy, and it might impact your security clearance.’” Elizondo further stated that in February of 2018, “Reid had launched an investigation against me through the U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI), in the hopes of finding derogatory information about me and/or to substantiate his claim of mental instability.”
To further discredit anything that may be tied to Reid, many will cite allegations against Reid of “sexual harassment or some other form of misconduct,” which the DoD/IG ultimately “did not substantiate” after an investigation. However, they did find that Reid had a relationship with a subordinate which gave the “perception of an inappropriate relationship and favoritism,” and he was also found to have “improperly used his personal e-mail accounts to conduct official DoD business.”
After these findings, Reid was ultimately transferred out of the now named OUSDI(I&S). In an emailed statement to The Black Vault in April 2022 by then Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby, “We can confirm that Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security Ron Moultrie has directed the reassignment of Mr. Garry Reid to the Defense Intelligence Agency.”
However, these memos appear to not substantiate or support Elizondo’s more pointed claims made in the complaint against Reid, nor do they give any indication this was an effort orchestrated by Reid to discredit Elizondo in retaliation for anything. For example, Elizondo claimed that in the February 2018 timeframe, Reid had launched an investigation through AFOSI, “…in the hopes of finding derogatory information about me and/or to substantiate his claim of mental instability.” That appears to not be the case or how the situation unfolded. Rather, AFOSI had already been notified since December of the previous year that there was a security concern, and this was based off of classified emails that Elizondo had written with the videos in question attached, talking about the aim to, “declassify one or more” of them. In addition, Reid also had the concern that at the TTSA press conference, Elizondo stated TTSA was, “… planning to provide never-before-released footage from real U.S. government systems.” The combination of these facts is clearly what AFOSI was notified about in December 2017, and what they ultimately took action on.
Someone stating they were going to release “never-before-released” U.S. government videos, while having previously talked about those same videos in classified emails, and then later being the main source of a NY Times article that published those videos within a short time after of their “sudden departure” from the DoD; all of that would be a legitimate concern for any senior official, no matter who was involved and no matter what the topic was.
There was nothing within Reid’s memos, nor the AFOSI investigation paperwork released through FOIA, indicating that the scope of their investigation sought anything outside the idea that potentially classified videos may have leaked into the public domain. There was no mention of “mental stability,” nor any mention of reaching outside the stated scope of their investigation.
And to further negate the idea Reid was the ringleader who was able to, without justification, “launch an investigation through the AFOSI” as Mr. Elizondo stated; AFOSI had previously turned down Reid to investigate Elizondo in late November of 2017. Pending additional evidence to support such an action, AFOSI stated to Reid they would not launch an investigation into Elizondo, showing Reid did not have the control to do whatever, whenever, he wanted and launch unjust investigations based on a “personal targeted vendetta and abuse of power,” as Elizondo termed it within his complaint.
The Black Vault uncovered via the FOIA that Elizondo’s “complaint” was closed about 9 months after it was submitted. According to the DoD/IG, Elizondo’s submitted evidence did, “…not support [the]reprisal complaint because no action affecting his eligibility for access to classified information was taken or threatened against him,” Nilgun Tolek, Director, Whistleblower Reprisal Investigations said in a letter to Elizondo’s attorney. “Accordingly, we are closing his case.”
These Memos and Beyond
These memos paint a complex picture of Elizondo’s final days at the DoD and the concerns his departure generated. They offer a deeper understanding of the internal reactions and security measures taken in response to his resignation and subsequent public revelations about AATIP, and offer more pieces of the puzzle when trying to decipher what truly happened within the walls of the Pentagon in the days and weeks following, arguably, one of the biggest and most controversial UFO stories of all time.
The Black Vault’s inquiry into these matters is far from over. The documents received contained references to a “classified enclosure” related to AATIP, along with a “TAB A” also about AATIP, that were not included in the FOIA release. The questions that appear to have been submitted by Mattis (or the SecDef office) were all in quotations, clearly indicating another document exists with those questions. In other words, other forms of correspondence likely exist, as the absence of these items from the release was not explained in the FOIA release letter (ie: pages exempted and withheld, etc.). These facts led to an appeal being filed by The Black Vault, and additional requests being filed for more documentation. Once received, if at all, future updates will be posted.
###
Released Documents
FOIA Case 18-F-0324 [10 Pages, 2.2MB] (Note: The pages of the PDF were re-ordered for ease of reading. They have been put in chronological order, with TAB B and TAB C under the first memo where they first appeared)
Unedited Questions and Statements
  |
Questions submitted to Luis Elizondo through Todd McMurtry
Response from Mr. McMurtry speaking for Luis Elizondo “Thank you for allowing Mr. Elizondo the opportunity to respond to your questions. He believes he has already answered these questions repeatedly and will stand by his prior public statements. To clarify one point, his memorandum of resignation directed to John Garrity was simply an official notification to his direct supervisor. His resignation letter to the Secretary of Defense and the DoD was his explanation as to why he was resigning and expressing his concerns with the bureaucratic challenges and other issues that created hurdles for the investigation of UAP, which present national security concerns. As Mr. Elizondo’s resignation letter states, underestimating or ignoring these potential threats is not in the best interest of the DoD and the American people, and he hoped resigning and calling attention to these matters would encourage positive change. As evident by where we are today in the UAP disclosure process, his efforts were clearly successful. As a reminder, you are aware of the fact that Mr. Elizondo was cleared of any wrongdoing by an official AFOSI investigation in 2019. As for the remainder of your questions, Mr. Elizondo will be addressing many of these points in his upcoming book and prefers to rely upon that writing rather than creating a separate account through this response. “ |
 |
Questions submitted to Mr. Christopher Mellon
Response from Mr. Mellon “I appreciate your efforts to bring credit to the brave individual who provided me the famous unclassified DoD UAP videos.However, I am compelled to honor their request for privacy. In due time hopefully that individual will receive the credit they richly deserve for helping our nation overcome a glaring intelligence failure and an unfortunate and misplaced prejudice against the legitimate and vitally important UAP issue. Keep up the good work. Perhaps some day the Black Vault will succeed in bringing to light information that has a comparable benefit for science and national security.” |
Follow The Black Vault on Social Media:
[ad_2]
Source link
