Has there been an actual breakdown behind the weighting of all his claims? There's no 1:1 connection between the claims and which ones are backed up by evidence presented and which ones are 2nd hand reports.
The whole idea of testifying under oath about 2nd hand information is a weird logical loophole, because he himself has never seen an alien or a UFO, he has talked to officials who know information, but they are not testifying themselves, so we are left to assume that his sources are actually reliable in the first place.
Assuming they exist, it's clear that the aliens are observers. They don't want to effect us, they aren't harvesting resources, or trying to kill us, or even trying to save us.
They just want to watch us.
It's possible that these observers have contacted governments saying that if we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone.
The US might have actually broken this treaty by capturing a craft/alien, and that's why there's so much secrecy around it.