Росс Култхарт слышал от источников, что некоторым осведомителям угрожали подписать новые соглашения о неразглашении: «Я не хочу компрометировать источники, но я готов сказать, что я знаю, что людям угрожали подписать новые соглашения о неразглашении».

In most cases, such as a congressional oversight investigation, the NDA contract is unenforceable if it’s requiring an employee to not report something that it’s their legal duty to report.

Can anybody explain what this means? Because I’ll be honest, between this and his announcement that at least one aerospace firm supposedly trying to divest itself of a craft, I’m not getting a good feeling about where this is heading.

NDAs do not apply to crimes. So this is weird if true. I could see it being a way to try to weed out some rats though. Ask people to sign new NDAs and see if they refuse or react like they’re nervous or something. I would sign it gladly knowing that it wouldn’t ever hold up.

Safe to say they’re doing everything possible to avoid the potential consequences coming from Congress. They have way too much time to figure out a way around it

Submission Statement:

Investigative journalist [Ross Coulthart](https://twitter.com/rosscoulthart) on [The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford](https://twitter.com/GoodTroubleShow) has been told by sources that some whistleblowers have been threatened to sign new NDAs (Non-Disclosure Agreements).

Full interview: https://www.youtube.com/live/yL0P_nOVMU0?feature=share

Shoutout, of course, to u/TheGoodTroubleShow

—————————————————————————

Full Transcript:

MF:

«I want to jump back to what you had said earlier, which I thought was significant. That you were hearing that whistleblowers as part of that harassment are being asked to sign a new NDA? Did I catch that right and have you heard anything as far as is the wording any different is it more of just a reminder of hey you better not talk this is the first I’ve ever heard of this?»

RC:

«I don’t want to get into specifics because I don’t want to compromise sources but what I am prepared to say is that I know people are being **threatened to sign new NDAs.**

If you recall it’s part of the national defense authorization act that all such NDAs have to be disclosed to the Congress, or to the AARO. So we’ve got this ridiculous situation where clearly I believe there are **people inside the intelligence community who are operating in direct contradiction to the stated intention of the Congress and that’s serious, I mean, that’s criminality!**

That’s criminal behavior by intelligence operatives going around intimidating people! I’m sitting here knowing that I’m in contact with people and I’ve been talking to David Grusch obviously for some time, and he’s one of multiple people who are aware of what the public wants to know and they’re worried. They’re worried that there is a deliberate attempt to frustrate the good intentions of good people in the Congress and the big question is this: Is the Congress going to let them get away with that?

I think they might, I still think this might all get put back into a box.»

Listened to the whole posdcast, according to ross some peoples are trying to discredit David Grusch saying that he is unreliable because he has autism, disgusting

You also have peoples downright [making shit up](https://twitter.com/MiddleOfMayhem/status/1674433009221775362) to make him look like a loon

Pass a new law to make forcing signing DNA illegal and invalid all of them for congressional hearings.

THIS IS TREASON!!!

Its not ok!!!! The American Tax Payers want to know.

I was one of those saying, from what I understood, that it was the reprisal claims that Grusch made were what was then said by the IGIC were credible.

I wasn’t alone in that understanding as Coulthart says in this interview that he *also* had to go back and get made clear what was the credible allegations. He is now saying his sources clarified that it was not only the retaliation claims that were credible but also the retrieval program itself.

Now, before the «I told you so’s!» it was highly premature to have made that claim when the reporter who broke this *also* had to go back and get clarification. Far, far to many heard what they wanted to and made assumptions that even Coulthart wasn’t sure of. His confirmation in this interview made me realize I was exactly right not to jump the gun on what the IGIC was saying when this interview with Grusch aired.

As it stands though, Coulthart did his follow-up and if his other sources are to be believed, and that it also an assumption until the hearings, we can all go forward with the idea that its all of what Grusch has said that the IGIC felt was real and credible.

It still remains to be seen if any of it holds up but this is certainly a step in the right direction towards keeping things concise and factual as to what or wasn’t being said by the IGIC to Congress.

So kudos to Coulthart for doing due diligence and for any who did question this because, again, even the reporter who broke this has to get clarification.

Many that immediately jumped to this before Ross did the work, honestly, you got lucky. You were right but this could’ve easily had gone the other way with Ross coming out and saying it *was* just the IGIC confirming the retaliation.

Its so easy to get swept up in all of this and without people like Coulthart, far too many would so go ahead and celebrate now with the I told you so’s but just understand how easily it could’ve been the debunkers throwing a different truth in your face.

Thankfully, I’m not a debunker or a believer, Im skeptical but through Ross’ hard work he provided people like me answers. It wasn’t an answer a believer or a debunker would want with how long it took but it’s an answer that was double and triple-checked precisely because people like me were like «Whoa…just wait a second. Is it saying this or is it saying that?» and Ross got us that answer unequivocally. It just took a while.

Edit: also just got to the part of Grush’s Asperger’s. I was unaware not being on social media that people were attacking Grusch for his neurodiversity, apparently saying because of that he is somehow deficient or easily deceived.

I have been diagnosed with Asperger’s years ago. I also test metals used in the aircraft people fly in everyday. You better hope I’m not deficient or easily deceived. You can doubt Grusch claims without bringing his Asperger’s into it and if you do (and whoever it is doing it) just know how low on the ring on humanity a person is to even consider doing that.

What a surprise, new NDAs, now that the dust falls off more excuses to escape while giving 0 evidence. Grifters won again.

Rolled my eyes so hard it broke my skull. Who cares? Again, look at the classified stuff that gets leaked all the time because someone thinks it’s in the national interest. Stop believing these buffoons telling you what you want to hear with no proof or even concrete allegations

We trust this dude?

And again another “my sources” statement.

The American government? Criminals?

*shocked Pikachu face*

I also know a guy who overheard a guy at the truck stop bathroom talking to his cat about his childhood friends experience with extraterrestrials 🙄

So the ‘NEW’ NDAs would say… ? You can’t say ‘this is not an NDA. So you can’t disclose anything allowed by NDA legislation. It’s now called a STFU agreement.’ Lol

And who has silenced the MSM ?