I agree that there is a lot of sense there, when it comes to condemnation by innuendo. But they shoot themselves in the foot when they say that his cheating would be exposed if he plays in the public arena for long enough. No, it won't, unless we know
how he is cheating - if he is. And if he is, then it's quite possible, I suppose, that Carlsen has been, too! It's just as well that chess is not important, don't you think?!
And this is unprovable: "once a player believes their opponent is cheating, that inevitably affects their own play." It's an expectation, rather.
I think it must be connected with hair-dos. They are worryingly similar. And also worrying, full stop!