Rep. Eric Burlison Highlights David Grusch’s Attempted Outreach to Missing Gen. Neil McCasland, While Allegations Surface Over Altered UAP Hearing Record

The question of UAP data transparency has long been contentious, with lawmakers, investigators, and journalists offering divergent accounts of what the public record actually shows. In this context, Rep. Eric Burlison addressed two developments with overlapping implications for congressional oversight: allegations that an official record from a UAP hearing was improperly altered, and the growing concern surrounding the disappearance of retired Maj. Gen. William Neil McCasland, a figure some in Congress have sought to interview in connection with UAP inquiries.

Allegations about the integrity of the congressional record arose as journalist Jeremy Corbell asserted that materials from a past UAP hearing were manipulated, including the insertion of a blank page described as referencing “Immaculate Constellation.” Corbell linked the episode to staff connected to Rep. Nancy Mace and warned lawmakers against relying on journalist Michael Shellenberger, whom he accused of untrustworthiness. Burlison, for his part, said he learned of the matter after the fact and had been told a cover letter was removed for appearing promotional, adding that he prioritized the document’s content rather than its cover sheets. Corbell rejected that explanation as false and suggested the issue could hold legal significance, offering to provide evidence for review. The competing claims underscore a persistent fault line in the UAP debate: whether official proceedings and public-facing documentation have been curated or altered in ways that obscure the record. Resolving the dispute will require documentation, chain-of-custody clarity, and, if warranted, formal inquiry by the bodies that govern congressional procedure.

Parallel to the transparency concerns is the disappearance of McCasland, last seen in Albuquerque on February 27. According to law-enforcement statements cited in coverage shared during the discussion, his phone and prescription glasses were left at home, while a wallet and .38-caliber revolver were reportedly missing; New Mexico authorities issued a Silver Alert, and the FBI joined the search. Investigators have stated there is no evidence that his disappearance is connected to his past work, which included commanding the Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base—an institution that frequently appears in public speculation about UAP-related research. McCasland’s wife, Susan, addressed online rumors with a wry social-media comment, attempting to defuse claims of extraordinary involvement.

Burlison said Congress has considered McCasland a relevant voice for UAP oversight efforts and that whistleblower David Grusch previously attempted to contact him. By Burlison’s account, McCasland has declined to engage, indicating he had nothing to say on the topic. While this does not establish any conclusion about the general’s knowledge, it situates him within a network of individuals congressional investigators have attempted to interview. The host added that Grusch’s outreach dated to 2020, suggesting the interest is longstanding rather than opportunistic.

Beyond process and personnel, Burlison expressed the view that recent information he has reviewed points to technology beyond current U.S. capabilities. He described the implications as “almost terrifying” and an “ontological shock,” while acknowledging that potential foreign adversaries could be responsible. Such assertions emphasize the stakes for rigorous data-sharing, classified-to-unclassified pathways, and independent validation by scientific and technical experts.

Taken together, the allegations of an altered congressional record and the unresolved search for a potentially key witness reflect the broader difficulties that have long surrounded UAP governance: uneven transparency, contested narratives, and the challenge of integrating credible leads with responsible skepticism. Further clarity will hinge on verifiable documentation regarding the hearing record, continued law-enforcement updates on McCasland’s whereabouts, and structured access to the highest-quality sensor and materials data for independent review. Until then, the debate will continue to turn on evidence—what exists, who holds it, and how it reaches the public record without distortion.