Again, I don't think pointing out that someone is lying is disparaging them, not when the motive is pure.
So for example, it is Geshe Kelsang that said that the Dalai Lama is lying. If we cannot take sides, are we to say Geshe-la is wrong? By logic you might be saying we are? But somehow or other it's fine if the Dalai Lama himself says whatever he wants.
So for me, this is the problem of having been in the political position since the 5th Dalai Lama recognition to the present 14th one; these sorts of arguements where we take one line and say oh that guy is knowing the future so always we can never say anything against the Dalai Lama, but it is okay if the Dalai Lama says things against what Trijang Rinpoche said.... well, that is just a double standard based on politics.
So, yes, Trijang Rinpoche knows the future, as in my opinion does Geshe Kelsang Gyastso. I think it would make sense that sometimes lamas say things in a certain context, like of the time they said it, not as a universal truth that we must continue for generations to come.
With the example I gave before of the river, we ask for instance, a Buddha emanation should we cross this river?
He says yes, this river is good to cross, so we do.
Then, years later, when he is in his next body, and while there are robbers etc. in front of the river, plowing on across the river, when maybe by then the conditions had changed, wouldn't make sense. Yes, Trijang RInpoche is omniscient, but that doesn't mean he thinks we are. So, maybe we could cross the river for the next 30 years, or something, but then by the time I am worried about it in my next life, there is a bridge or a better route or we've left Tibet.... conditions change. So, to do what he is saying at the time, back in the 1960s okay--- on an advise like that--- this trying to force people to follow one line a lama said when we (in many cases) weren't even born, and don't have full context of the situation doesn't really make a lot of sense.
I think it is okay to tell the Dalai Lama to stop lying, because Geshe Kelsang says the Dalai Lama is lying, so for me he is showing right activity of acting normally to the Dalai Lama; we still live in the world; if the Dalai Lama were a Buddha, then why would it bother him if people did not see him as one? Other Buddhas are not upset by this? It is politics to say we need to always listen to what one guy says, and we can't say anything against him, and we will take things out of context by other high Rinpoches to shut people down so that they won't say anything against them. It's an old political trick of the Gelugpa school since the time of the 5th, nothing more.