I find this all very odd.<p>This Grusch guy has presented evidence to congress, and the inspector general etc, about his own whistleblower complaint. Everyone is assuming there is no evidence, but <i>there is</i>. We just can't legally see it.<p>I think writing endless articles claiming this guy is full of shit because we aren't seeing his evidence is premature, because the people involved do seem to agree that this evidence is present. It all seems to be jumping to conclusions on all sides. Maybe it's aliens, maybe it's not, maybe it's just government disinfo, maybe it's not.<p>But to confidently say it's all made up is just as misinformed as saying it's aliens if you can't legally see the documents he presented, in the same way calling someone a murderer is premature if you aren't privy to the evidence in court. And saying that he's wrong because you aren't allowed to see his evidence is missing the forest for the trees.