If that's really all you have, then it is a stretch to accuse someone of lying. The evidence supporting him being a groyper is relatively stronger.

It's not about what I have; it's about what's objectively true. Please lay out your strong case.

Edit: don't forget to provide sources!

This isn't debate club, you can figure out sources yourself. The guy spoke groyper lingo, dressed like a groyper, posed for pictures like a groyper. It is not unreasonable to use duck typing.

Does this mean he IS a groyper? Ha, of course not, it is just anecdotal evidence pointing in that direction. But your argument is that because law enforcement says he has a transgender roommate or partner, he can't possibly be a groyper. Uh, sure. Okay.

> you can figure out sources yourself.

I have plenty but it's your turn!

"dressed like a" vs "law enforcement says"

Uh, sure. Okay. I thought you said you had a stronger case.