CIA Officer Testifies to Illegal Spying on UAP Whistleblowers and Officials
During a May 13, 2026 Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing officially titled “Whistleblower Testimony on the COVID Coverup,” longtime CIA operations officer James Erdman III publicly accused elements within the intelligence community of illegally surveilling U.S. government investigators, whistleblowers, and personnel involved in sensitive federal inquiries. While the hearing focused primarily on COVID-19 origins and lab-leak suppression, Erdman’s confirmation that the Directors Initiatives Group (DIG) also investigated unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) and anomalous health incidents (Havana Syndrome) immediately drew intense attention from the UAP disclosure community.
Erdman, a 20-year CIA veteran serving on joint duty with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s Directors Initiatives Group from March 2025 to April 2026, stated in his opening remarks that he led investigations into “COVID origins, anomalous health incidents, and unidentified anomalous phenomena.” He alleged that CIA elements illegally monitored DIG personnel’s computer and phone usage, their investigative work, and contacts with whistleblowers.
“The CIA illegally monitored the computer and phone usage of DIG personnel, their investigations, and contact with whistleblowers,” Erdman testified. “These were Americans being spied upon illegally while executing duties directed by the President and under the authority of the Director of National Intelligence.”
The DIG was a small, temporary task force of roughly up to 10 personnel, established under DNI Tulsi Gabbard in 2025 to support Trump administration transparency, accountability, and declassification initiatives.
Erdman’s testimony triggered comparisons to the 1970s Church Committee and included his call for a potential new investigation into intelligence community abuses if oversight continues to fail.
Investigative journalist Jeremy Corbell amplified the testimony on May 19, 2026, declaring that “the cover-up just testified against itself.” According to Corbell, he and George Knapp had worked in good faith to connect UAP whistleblowers with DIG officials under this transparency effort.
Those whistleblowers reportedly included Dylan Borland, Matthew Brown, Jay Stratton, Alexandro Wiggins, Lue Elizondo, David Grusch, and David Fravor. Corbell claims the same illegal monitoring described by Erdman extended to UAP-related communications, with efforts made to intimidate sources, shape the emerging narrative, and obstruct congressional oversight on hidden aerospace programs and non-human intelligence.
The timing of the testimony is especially significant. Erdman, still an active CIA officer, appeared under subpoena issued May 5 despite agency resistance. The following day, the Senate committee sent a no-retaliation letter to CIA Director John Ratcliffe.
Additional allegations include CIA personnel seizing approximately 40 boxes of files from ODNI spaces as they were being prepared for declassification. The CIA has pushed back, calling the hearing “political theater.”
As of mid-May 2026, UAP disclosure has entered a volatile, high-stakes acceleration under the second Trump administration. On May 8, the Department of War launched the Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP Encounters (PURSUE), releasing the first tranche of over 150 declassified files—including videos, images, FBI records, NASA transcripts, and historical memos—on the new war.gov/UFO portal.
President Trump promoted the release with the message, “WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?” That same day, Corbell’s documentary Sleeping Dog premiered eight previously unreleased military UAP videos featuring morphing orbs, colored spheres, triangular craft, and other anomalies. Further revelations at the May 15 McMenamins UFO Festival included hints at Project Rubik’s Cube from Dylan Borland and details of an unreleased 10-hour tetrahedral/pyramid-shaped UAP incident over sensitive Department of Energy infrastructure captured on Honeywell footage.
For many in the UAP community, Erdman’s allegations fit into a long-established pattern of CIA involvement in UFO secrecy and advanced technology protection. Since the early 1950s, the Agency has played a central role in managing the UFO issue — most notably through the 1953 Robertson Panel, which recommended monitoring and debunking UFO sightings to reduce public concern. This legacy of narrative control and compartmentalization is exemplified by Project Azorian in the 1970s, where the CIA built the massive Hughes Glomar Explorer under a deep-sea mining cover to recover a sunken Soviet submarine — an operation that popularized the “Glomar Response” of “neither confirm nor deny.” That culture of secrecy persists today through specialized units such as the Weapons and Counterproliferation Mission Center (WCPMC), which evaluates exotic high-energy technologies, and the highly classified Office of Global Access (OGA) within the Science and Technology Directorate. The OGA has reportedly coordinated global retrieval operations of non-human craft since 2003, supporting claims by whistleblowers like David Grusch that at least nine such craft — some intact — have been recovered and hidden from oversight. These structures continue to fuel suspicions that the CIA is actively shielding legacy UAP programs, recovered technologies, and non-human intelligence activities from both Congress and the American public.
Some observers now argue that Erdman’s sworn testimony represents one of the strongest publicly documented claims of institutional interference with official UAP investigations to date. While critics dismiss parts of the hearing as politically motivated, supporters see it as evidence of a deeper constitutional oversight crisis. For the UAP disclosure community, the combination of official releases, whistleblower activity, explosive new footage, and these historic allegations marks a potential turning point in the decades-long battle for transparency. Whether this pressure finally overcomes entrenched resistance — or whether legacy programs remain shielded — may define the future of UAP disclosure.
