There are different views of the movement.  Just a few examples:

https://twitter.com/TGTM_Official/status/1518031719344992257?cxt=HHwWgsCr1cnzkJEqAAAA

I would say the translation is good, but where is the "lie" part?  I don't think any word in the original Chinese or translated English indicate it is a "lie".  Of course, the person translating can have the opinion that what she says is a "lie", but that is the personal opinion of the translator, does not necessarily mean what she says is true or false.  So the translator just translated something then "appended" some personal opinion.

https://twitter.com/yanwangtanbing1/status/1516405563281747968?cxt=HHwWgMCt7eq0rYsqAAAA

This is a typical case of incorrect translation which can leave very different impression for the user.  "人大代表" basically is the equivalent of congressperson in US, like the senators and representatives in US congress.  So the newspaper simply reported an invertivew, just like a certain US senator or representative said something to a reporter in US. Someone in the legislative branch said something, isn't that most normal in a free society?  Didn't we say it is ok for congress person to announce views even seems "wrong", as this is escentially their job? There are US congress representatives saying all kind of wacky things on media all the time. 

However, "Deputies" is "a person whose immediate superior is a senior figure within an organization and who is empowered to act as a substitute for this superior.", which would indicate this is a more "formal" view of the executive branch of the government and would/could indicate a future policy.  Also, the translation used "deputies", not "deputy", indicating this would be a group of person expressing a common view, not a single person expressing personal view.

The following content in the translation correctly identified the person interviewed as the "representative" of the national congress, so why would the title suddenly change to "deputies"?  Also, "Deputies to the congress" would mean the group of person expressed the view to the national congress (indicating the formalness of the view), while the report is only a representative express the view to a reporter in a random interview.  Is this fabricating a title for the article to create fake news?