If you read their comment you’d know that’s not what they were saying. All they’re suggesting is that being trans doesn’t automatically make someone unworthy of respect and that the idea that it does needs to go away. This notably says nothing about trans people are automatically perfect beings as you seem to want to believe they said.

https://xcancel.com/elizlaraki/status/1846252781851890026

The twitter link from the article for those that want it

I don’t think they are. It’s very common for the right wing to accuse things of being funded by “the Jews” either by proxy like George Soros or even more generally “the global elite”.

I suspect that’s what they’re referring to, though you’re absolutely right that the state Israel is funding this sort of stuff, not the identity of Jew

There are now deterrent nets and misters, I suspect the geese wouldn’t figure it out without them

What about their reply made you think they held this opinion? Genuine question, it doesn’t read that way at all to me.

I enjoy not having corporate censorship deciding what I can and can’t see or say; not that I comment or post that much.

I believe they’re saying the stuff in the parentheses are things the US is doing

Maybe a slightly different example will help understand the logic?

Let’s say NewsCorpA likes Trump and Spacey.

NewsCorpA publishes their usual stuff saying they’re both cool and good, but one day they post an article saying Trump did something bad. Because they have every reason to like Trump it seems more likely to me that the article has a genuine criticism (not to say their reasoning is good. E.g. He’s not racist enough), but that doesn’t have any bearing on the other, usual, articles about Spacey.

In other words it’s kinda the inverse of “if someone hates someone and says something nice about them, it’s probably genuine” so kinda “if someone likes someone and says something bad about them, it’s probably genuine”