Yes, you covered a few of the larger holes in @steemchillers narrative. Whether you choose to believe JSun's initial statements (move Steem to Tron blockchain, use contacts at exchanges to delist "old" Steem and list a "new" Steem (Tron token) or his second statements, it is misleading at best to leave out the first set of statements. IMO, there is no reason at all to believe that the first set of statements aren't exactly what JSun intended (and likely, intends) to do.

However, I think it is worse to leave out that news broke in the week after JSun's second statements (his statements to the effect that he would not vote witnesses and would not attempt to migrate chain to Tron) that JSun had already broken the exact same promise in the Tron ecosystem, and had used Tron Foundation genesis stake to vote in SR's (Tron equivalent of witnesses). Is there a meaningful difference between:
"JSun promised not to vote for witnesses, witnesses out of fear decided to freeze his stake anyway" and "JSun promised not to vote for witnesses, news came out that he had broken exact same promise not to vote in block producers with Tron genesis stake, and witnesses out of fear decided to freeze his stake"? Of course there is a very meaningful difference, and leaving out that part shows whose pocket you are in. Geez.

Then @steemchiller went ahead and lost his mind publicly with the "external security experts" line. Please look up what "decentralized" means. 20 puppet witnesses controlled by one individual is 100% clear, not an opinion, no two ways about it, centralization. A super majority of independent elected witnesses coming to a consensus is 100% clear, not an opnion, no two ways about it, decentralized governance in action. This last bit is not disputable, these are not opinions that can be thought about one way or another - centralization and decentralization are real words with clear definitions and @steemchiller has lost any credibility he may have had on this network with this stance.