I watched the interview - that's the proverbial can-of-worms, right there.

I'm into breaking stuff down to things we know. In this case we know:

Matthew Livelsberger wasn't an Arabian terrorist (linked to Bourbon St incident). He was a crack soldier/patriot - Trump supporter - with expertise in military drones.

He did write the manifesto. Doesn't make the things he said facts, that we don't know yet, but it's a fact that he wrote it. The central points were:

1. China & US have gravitical propulsion, which he connected to the US NE drone event. Could it be the disclosure was not about ufos exactly, more about disclosing the leap-forward in drone anti-gravitational propulsion tech ... ? (This would fit well with the tennis-ball-inverted-theory, no?)

2. War crimes were committed by US military higher-ups in Afghanistan ... then covered-up.

There was a big war crimes case in Aus a couple of years ago - a celebrity-hero-soldier/politician, who ran a frontline squad, went rogue , started shooting civilians in fits of pique.
So war crimes happened, but this is different. It's Julian Assange level. It involves testimony that top-level management executed war crimes ... in this case via deliberate drone attacks.
That's the movie that doesn't end with the frontline rogue guy - it goes all the way to the top - wherever that is ... & i think that's the point ... no-one is accountable coz the machine dunnit.

3. The FBI or Homeland were onto him.

As you would be. They'd be dumber than i thought if they weren't - an active military malcontent ... with top-secret knowledge. They'd be tracking their personal up their ga-zoos - surely you'd be tracking that guy.
His testimony could/probably will be explained as ptsd induced paranoia. Livelsberger likely had that as an input - killing people for a living is liable to kick-back on you, psychologically.
But it's not an auto-dismissal for what he documented either, as an insider.
In reality, you're not gonna hear of that kinda raw information from an insider, unless the experience of accumulating it has messed them up in some way. There's no other kind.

4. The manifesto was instantly flagged/de-platformed by MSM's algorithms.
Normally they'd leap all over those kinda sordid details of a lone-nut killer - so that's notable in itself. It means there's something in what he said which is deemed not suitable for maintaining community standards.

5. It was more of a dramatic self-immolation than a terrorist attack. He was pro-Trump - therefore deducably pro-Musk - sounds like, in his mind, he was trying to send a grand wake-up call targeted at those two - rather than cause mass civilian fatalities.

The implications, like the cyber-truck, are mind-blowing, but also unsurprising. I'm leaning towards the tic-tac ufos being what Livelsberger was talking about.
Which puts us on a new nuclear-war-threat-status. If you think about it, graviatic/anti-gravity propulsion is the next/inevitable extension of war-tech - it's a game-changer.
Which instantly makes me auto-suspicious of the point of the exercise. These things always seem to end up with a human-rights-shrinking-effect.