Shouldn't this be "didn't lie"?

As said elsewhere - didn't lie is correct, wasn't lying is fine but is more meme-y - memes use a lot of silly English and I would avoid using them as a reference point until you're fluent. 

That's quite a funny joke

He didn't lie He wasn't lying

was not lying (wasn’t lying) - continuous past. Think about it as a state. He was not in the state of lying. didn’t lie - simple past. Think of it as a verb - he did not lie.

Both fit ig

It works both ways just conveys two different things, the original shows that the dude in the comic was not lying eg present when he said “you’ll be ok” however your trying to say the dude Didn’t lie which means the caption would be separate viewer commenting on the already happened comic so past tense (sorry terribly explained)

No the post is correct

It's meme-speak. Don't try to learn English from things like that. It's fine, though, in that context. He was not lying, and he did not lie.

The post is correct. Didn’t lie would also be right but “didn’t lie” and “wasn’t lying” mean slightly different things.

In this case both are correct and mean essentially the same thing. Think of this as meaning the same as “Bro wasn’t lying when he said ‘you’ll be ok..’”1

“Bro wasn’t lying [when he said the other guy would be OK]”

I’d add that “he ain’t lying” or “bro wasn’t lying”, are to me almost idiomatic in that there’s no suspicion of lying required. They’re phrases used to emphasize that the original speaker was/is right.

Both are correct here. "He wasn't lying" works if you're saying it about the conversation as it occurred. "He didn't lie" works if you're referencing what was said specifically.

He wasn't lying when he said that. Which was yesterday. He said that yesterday, and he was lying. So, you're correct, he lied. Yesterday, when he spoke.

The phrase "He wasn't lying" is short for "He wasn't lying when he said X", at least that's my guess

Sometimes we say **x wasn't lying** in a semi idiomatic way which equates more to **I agree with what x said earlier**. It is not genuinely making an observation about truth or lies, but rather is expressing agreement, usually about the degree of something previously described. For example, earlier Sally told us it was very windy outside today. Now I am outside and it is extremely windy so I would say Sally **wasn't lying** about this wind! Amir wasn't lying when he told me this week's grammar topic is really hard. The guy at the coffee shop wasn't lying when he said the traffic is crazy this morning. There is no real possibility/likelihood that anyone was lying, and nobody suspects it, it's an idiomatic way of affirming something someone said earlier. In the comic the humour comes from someone telling somebody else they're in distress, the other person not doing anything about it, then the distressed person dies and the other guy says Bro wasn't lying. In other words, wow he sure was distressed, wasn't he.

Both are grammatically correct, they’re just different ways of saying the same thing

The past continuous tense sounds good, because it puts your frame of reference at the time of the action. It's more active and dynamic, while the past tense is more static and final. There's not a whole lot of practical difference between the two. They can typically both be used in a given scenario. The specific scenario I can think of where you'd definitely want to use the past continuous tense is if you're describing an action that was interrupted. "He was driving in a straight line, but then a deer jumped in front of his car, and he swerved off the road." I don't think it would be incorrect to say "He drove in a straight line" here, but it sounds odd and abrupt.

You’re correct. “Bro didn’t lie” is correct. However, there’s a fixed phrase in English: “[someone] wasn’t lying.” Kind of a surprised realizing of someone being right, usually humorous and colloquial. Additionally, this whole picture is a meme as “bro wasn’t lying” is a play on words: “bro wasn’t positioned horizontally” and “bro wasn’t telling falsehoods.”

Both are fine, but we tend to say “wasn’t lying” in more casual situations. I think technically “didn’t lie” is more correct in this example but grammar rules are often broken in casual speech

It's nuanced. "He didn't lie" comes from a present perspective... at this point now, I can tell you that he didn't lie. "He wasn't lying" comes from a time perspective of the occurrence... looking backward to a perspective of that point in time, I can tell you that he wasn't lying. You can for the most part interchange them and be understood, but the nuance is what timeframe your mind is set.

lmaao

Simple past sounds more like you’re expecting what’s to come next, and continuous more like you’re just referring back to the time the act was taking place. But the difference is just by a minuscule amount. The colloquial preference suggests that you use the continuous past.

no