Public Affairs emails about Elizondo

From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Categories:
Lue Abcde (b)(6)
Wednesday, June 5, 2019 3:47 PM
(b)(6)
[Non-DoD Source] Substantiating documentation - Elizondo
Lue_Elizond_Mission_Transfer_Documentation(2).pdf
Follow up
Flagged
Red Category
Hi (b)(6)
I am reaching out in a final effort to avoid seeing this unfortunate situation escalate. As a soldier and public servant
with decades of unblemished service, these false accusations are personally painful as you can well
imagine. Moreover, the clearly inaccurate information released by your office has the potential to profoundly
damage my career and with it my ability to provide for my wife and family.
In that regard, attached you will find a sample of unclassified correspondence that clearly demonstrates how active I
remained on the UAP issue right up until my departure, to include interagency coordination with the IC on this
important issue and operational collaboration with the US Navy. The transition plans referenced herein were briefed
to and approved by a senior political appointee who reported directly to General Mattis. Some of the F-18 pilots and
Navy officials can confirm multiple briefings and discussions with this individual and others, to include
Congress. Some of these discussions and briefings actually occurred inside the SecDefs personal office
suite. That is why my emails reference "the front office."
Officials from other agencies and departments (ie DIA and CIA) attended meetings I held to coordinate activities on
this topic in support of the men and women in the US Navy, who as you know were and still are deeply perplexed
and concerned by this phenomenon. AATIP was an official program that was never shut down, when the funding
dried-up I continued to lead and interact with officials in DoD and other agencies to the best of my ability in the
interest of national security. When I departed, as is clear from my resignation letter, it was purely out of frustration
with my ability to gain additional traction and support. But I put my shoulder to the wheel all those years and worked
diligently to maintain a focus on the AATIP issue and continued to coordinate and promote collection and
analysis. Call it an "activity" vs a "program" if you will, but if this escalates it will be easy to prove how active I
remained in support of our men and women in uniform, especially in the US Navy. If some who were not privy to my
actions want to portray me as a rogue, well bad on them for sitting on their hands and doing nothing about recurring
intrusions into US airspace and military operating areas and good on me for continuing to risk my reputation and
career in support of the US Navy and the nation. Personally, it is outrageous so many others did so little in the face
of what the Navy now publicly acknowledges is serious national security issue. The plain truth is that I did
everything I could to maintain focus and attention on this vital issue when so many others continued to sweep it
under the rug purely for fear of the stigma and possible impact on their reputations. And for that the department
wants to make me out to be the bad guy? An imposter? For showing initiative and support to the Navy and
others? For keeping this effort going as best I could -- an effort now fully vindicated by the Navy itself?
As you can well imagine, I am not only hurt and disappointed but angry. I should if anything be getting accolades for
persistence and initiative, especially since the Navy has now publicly acknowledged the seriousness of the issue,
something that only occurred because of my efforts. Instead, a knife in the back? Wow, thanks guys! If the
department wants to have this out in public we can certainly do so. I can easily establish that Neil took the meetings
referenced in these emails and that this plan was blessed by an individual who has departed but was at the time a
senior Administration appointee and directly reported to General Mattis. Do you honestly think I made up the stuff in
1