Many things.

But for one, he lobbied for a future where individuals would no longer legally be able to use blockchains directly or build businesses on them (aside from pure direct person-to-person payments).

Doesn't get much less "cryptobro" than lobbying against people being able to use blockchains.

I think he said a lot of things; and did the complete opposite. Why would any one statement carry any weight at all?

Well, since crypto bros actually believe their statements about NFTs etcetera, that's another way of agreeing with the thesis.