It appears your accusation is based solely on the investigators conclusions differing from your own.
the one from Hawaii to Phoenix, exists, but as soon as it was discovered that the underbelly of that plane was dark blue, that theory disappeared
Show the sequence of cause and effect by examples please.
My recollection is that as further data points became available
it became less likely that AWE808 was the culprit
and the search for a better fit to the data led to UPS902.
Which it turns out fits the data remarkably well.
but it has a whole 'nother flaw -- it's a flight heading into Ontario airport, which is only 40 miles beyond LAX. Ooops
Actually I took it as further evidence for the contrail hypothesis
as it solved a nagging problem I had with the Phoenix flight.
AWE808 overflew at constant altitude of 37000' and yet the contrail 'disappeared'. Why?
The UPS plane on the other hand began its approach descent into Ontario...
the contrails no longer formed when the plane left high altitude.
On the other hand, you refuse to take the word of, or you assume gross incompetence on the part of, a local professional airborne camerman with more than a decade of experience
LOL You bet I do!
One of my avocations has given me ample reason to question media reporting.
The CBS employee who stated the contrail "lit up the sky",
the CBS employee, who ipso facto was speaking without embellishment,
after all what possible motivation could he have for sexing up his report.
The US military on the other hand is obviously lying and covering up the truth.
That's what your opinion is based on: trust of an unproven, unvetted source of internet consipracy-disprover geeks, over trust of a) military officials b) Janes' missile expert c) many dozens of your fellow FReepers with a considerable wealth of actual on-site first-hand witness experiences on which to base their take of the origional video, and d) a pro airborne cameraman who's made a living by knowing what he's doing and what he's looking at in a very competitive market.
No my opinion is based on rudimentary knowledge of geography, physics, perspective and optics,
enhanced by the willingness to keep an open mind while doing some investigative work of my own,
and reinforced by a plethora of other images of similar occurrences..all being contrails.
Appeals to authority and denigrating those positing solutions differing from your own doesn't sway me.
You accuse me of not trusting military officials yet the military says there was no missile...
it appears that you're the one not trusting military officials.
A fellow FReeper's shared knowledge and opinion is valued
but not taken as final proof of anything...
if it were, then the FReeper who reported seeing this with his own eyes
and declaring it a plane would have settled the matter to your satisfaction.
May I suggest examining two of your premises...
Your interpetation of the visual data as indicating...
the object is moving from east to the west
and that the object is increasing in altitude.
Things are not always as they appear and the simpliest answer is often the correct one...
...................... 
Cheers