So "just like" John Smith if you meant less than 1/1000th the likelihood (John is also much more common than Ben).
But Shapiro is a Jewish name so let's include Israel too. Shapiro is 1/6697 out of 10 million so about 1500. Maybe a lot of those US Shapiros aren't Jewish after all? But never mind that.
So we've got around 25k Shapiros. Donating $100k+ is a "1%" problem to have so let's say 250. That are men, 125.
...that donated to this specific charity, and formally goes by the name "Ben" (not Benjamin) with no middle initial.
So it's possible it's somebody else and Ben Shapiro (political commentator) isn't the one that donated, but don't pretend that it's not unlikely. On the other hand, there is another Ben Shapiro known to the world, but he doesn't look like he's dropping $100k on a whim.
Right, if you assume Ben does what's in his best interest then everything he does makes tons of sense. If I was jewish I would probably be just like Ben in a lot of ways, even drink 5 red bulls a day.
This is shaky as fuck. The senator himself didn't allege explicitly that it was, so the article immediately violated the proper ethics on how to handle news and claimed explicitly that it was, due to an investigation by the political candidate. But the candidate didn't claim that it was, he's just arguing that he could have and is speculating.
If you are going to say that it someone did X, or you are going to say that it looks like they did X, then that's a substantial difference. Otherwise, we create a ridiculous game of telephone where each subtle iteration gets more and more inaccurate.
You can repost the X-tweet from the candidate as an allegation, but this is disinformation since you know the political candidate doesn't have hard proof that it is him.
Worth pointing out that Ben denied that it's him in the replies.
A denial from him is as good as a confession.
I was surprised he felt the need to reply to a tweet accusation at all.
Hence why the denial was suspicious. It smacks of getting flak because you're over the target.
There are many people named Ben Shapiro in the world. His name is quite common, unless you are suggesting names like John Smith are unique.
Oh look, the paid shill is here. What has a better income, shilling for Ukraine or Benji?
Oh no, somebody refusing to address the points is here. Quick, protect his feelings!
I only know of one Ben Shapiro. Where do you live that it's such a common name? Hmm...
I think every fifth jew has that name, don’t they?
You sound as retarded as if someone used the wrong pronoun on you.
Let's see... it's a U.S.-based charity so let's start with that.
Smith: 2376206 in the U.S.
Shapiro: 24712
So "just like" John Smith if you meant less than 1/1000th the likelihood (John is also much more common than Ben).
But Shapiro is a Jewish name so let's include Israel too. Shapiro is 1/6697 out of 10 million so about 1500. Maybe a lot of those US Shapiros aren't Jewish after all? But never mind that.
So we've got around 25k Shapiros. Donating $100k+ is a "1%" problem to have so let's say 250. That are men, 125.
...that donated to this specific charity, and formally goes by the name "Ben" (not Benjamin) with no middle initial.
So it's possible it's somebody else and Ben Shapiro (political commentator) isn't the one that donated, but don't pretend that it's not unlikely. On the other hand, there is another Ben Shapiro known to the world, but he doesn't look like he's dropping $100k on a whim.
You debunked it yourself. Congrats.
It is unlikely since he doesn't support this.
But stormfaggots are not known for nuance.
Oh hi, Ben. Didn't know you read this forum.
Can't really blame the guy for donating to causes that are in his own ethnic interests.
Right, if you assume Ben does what's in his best interest then everything he does makes tons of sense. If I was jewish I would probably be just like Ben in a lot of ways, even drink 5 red bulls a day.
HIAS is the same organization Mayorkis was a board member of before becoming DHS secretary
https://imgflip.com/i/8e9o53
Trust but verify, I verified and I can't even find out who writes the news articles of this website. Feels like fedposting propaganda website.
Shapiro has always been a Grifter and a Hustler
Post Reported for: Rule 12 - Falsehoods
Post Removed: Rule 12 - Falsehoods
This is shaky as fuck. The senator himself didn't allege explicitly that it was, so the article immediately violated the proper ethics on how to handle news and claimed explicitly that it was, due to an investigation by the political candidate. But the candidate didn't claim that it was, he's just arguing that he could have and is speculating.
If you are going to say that it someone did X, or you are going to say that it looks like they did X, then that's a substantial difference. Otherwise, we create a ridiculous game of telephone where each subtle iteration gets more and more inaccurate.
You can repost the X-tweet from the candidate as an allegation, but this is disinformation since you know the political candidate doesn't have hard proof that it is him.