Nobody is asking you to take Grusch's testimony as gospel. We are asking Congress to investigate the very specific claims he made to the ICIG, including locations, people and projects.

What I wonder, why would someone go out of their way and trying to discredit Grusch because he had PTS? Is that all part of the game to make his testimony seem more plausible? Or just a bad attempt at smearing his reputation? Idk.

You've misunderstood my point - I'm not saying he's trustworthy. I'm saying deciding whether or not he's trustworthy isn't such a black-and-white issue, and that I'm surprised at how black-and-white so many people are trying to make it. What if reality is more complicated and we're filtering out valuable information? What if he's not completely wrong, nor completely right? Just surprised at a lack of willingness to consider the grey areas.