I appreciate knowing what has a real possibility of happening. But, there are two angles that they are liable for:
- At any time, there can be a call for a special sale of becoming Sovereign. This is the most obvious, and I see there is much denying they would or could do this.
- By naming trusted pundits as Gatekeepers, they are sowing doubt. Pure propaganda of discouragement.
If they are telling the truth then these liabilities are unfortunate and they would do well to further shore up their case by showing supporting evidence of #2. I already mentioned one idea of a bitcoin transaction - the transaction hash ID, but I don't know what else they can supply that is verifiable. #1 is just hanging out there and they are doing all they can to dispel that. If they simply refused to name any gatekeepers they would be more believable to me.
It is possible that they list so many conservative pundits so that they would mention that they have been named and deny it - thus spreading the story. I don't know if this has worked so far. I watched an Alex Jones video entitled something like "Breaking: the technology behind the Great Reset!" ... looking for CSRQ to be mentioned. No, it was not mentioned. Alex himself didn't do the segment, and the host mentioned many times how much Alex has done to expose the Great Reset. In the end, this seemed to play into the CSRQ narrative. But it also could have been they had considered reporting on it but decided not to because it implicated him and he can say he didn't want to spread a baseless conspiracy theory.
There have been stories with verifiable information (Hunter Biden laptop, for instance) that were suppressed. What chance does a fascinating narrative that can only make claims have of spreading around. The gravity of this keeps this from spreading like an urban legend.