The UAP Disclosure Fund is now the Disclosure Foundation. Expanded mission — with a broader vision. We’re uniting policy research, legal support, and public education to help define how the world will operate in a post-disclosure world. https://t.co/nclm2JwSD0

2025 marked a year of focused progress for the Disclosure Foundation. From congressional briefings to legal analysis and academic engagement, here’s a concise summary of the work we advanced this year. https://t.co/SMZGkBVOaR

Some things you just never get over. ❤️

The Disclosure Foundation is expanding its Advisory Board with Dr. Hal Puthoff and Dr. Carlos Eire. A physicist and a historian. Science and the humanities. Deepening the expertise guiding our mission. Full announcement: https://t.co/Gk0OocGWeY

A critical statement from our Chairman. General Clapper has confirmed a secret US Air Force UAP program, Congress must now obtain the data and compel sworn testimony.

With the release of “The Age of Disclosure,” a wide range of former intelligence officials, military leaders, scientists, and members of Congress speak together, on record, and with notable specificity about UAP programs and reported recovery efforts spanning generations. These

Thanks so much Andy for the opportunity 🙏

We view this legal clarity as the first step. The broader task is ensuring meaningful protection for whistleblowers across all three categories of risk—legal, professional, and personal. We look forward to advancing that work.

The myth of prosecution has deterred disclosures for decades. Secure testimony to Congress is lawful and historically unpunished. The real challenges lie in protecting whistleblowers’ careers, safety, and livelihoods. Clarifying the law is the first step.

The law is clear: individuals may lawfully provide classified UAP information to Congress in a secure setting. The Constitution, statutes, and precedent all affirm this right. What persists is not a legal barrier—but a culture of deference and fear.

Congress has declassified information before—from the Church and Pike Committees to modern reforms—without legal consequence. The legislative branch has both the right and the precedent to act in the public interest.

Non-disclosure agreements do not supersede the Constitution. Any clause that purports to prevent lawful disclosure to Congress is void. No private contract can negate the separation of powers or congressional oversight authority.

The true risk for whistleblowers is professional and personal, not legal. Retaliation—though unlawful—remains common. This underscores the need for independent legal counsel and institutional protection, not silence in the face of misconduct.

Statutory mechanisms already exist for lawful, protected disclosure of classified information to Congress. The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act authorizes direct communication with congressional intelligence committees.

There has never been a single prosecution for providing classified information to Congress in a secure setting. The threat of criminal liability is a myth that has deterred oversight and protected secrecy, not national security.

Congress holds a constitutional “need to know.” Members do not require permission or clearances from the Executive to receive classified testimony. Oversight is not a privilege granted by the Executive—it is a duty under Article I.

Many former officials have internalized the Executive Branch’s narrative that disclosure to Congress is illegal. It is not. This misunderstanding has allowed classification to be weaponized to evade congressional oversight.

Understanding these differences matters. The legal risk surrounding lawful, private disclosures to Congress is frequently overstated. Our July policy brief explains why this distinction is crucial: https://t.co/ukPYi3XWYy Let’s walk through the key points.

🧵 UAP whistleblowers face three distinct categories of risk that are often blurred together: 1️⃣ Legal risk (prosecution) 2️⃣ Professional risk (retaliation) 3️⃣ Personal risk (safety and livelihood) This thread focuses on important details in the legal landscape.

Great to see the Disclosure Foundation contributing to the conversation at Yale. These conversations are important for building a more informed and transparent approach to UAP issues. Worth attending if you are in the area.

Tomorrow at @Yale. Join us for an open event on UAP transparency, national security, and future tech. Speakers: Dillon Guthrie, Kirk McConnell, Dr. Anna Brady-Estevez, and Jordan Flowers. 5:30 to 8:30 pm at OC Marsh Lecture Hall. You can RSVP here: https://t.co/O88uNUfjiw

Our Advisory Board member, Prof. Avi Loeb, just launched a public survey on beliefs about extraterrestrial intelligence. Understanding where the public stands helps shape responsible science, policy, and transparency. Take the survey 👇 🔗 https://t.co/jCN1cEeHij