“Why would you even get into bestiality?” he asked. “We’re not into bestiality,” said Patel.
In a further exchange, Patel explained to Senator John Kennedy, the Louisiana Republican, that previously, regulations had barred anyone who engaged in bestiality “on either side of it.”
“Either side of what, the bestiality?” asked Kennedy. “So you disqualified the animal?”
“We have great canines, but we’re not going to disqualify them,” said Patel.
“Why would you even get into bestiality?” he asked. “We’re not into bestiality,” said Patel.
In a further exchange, Patel explained to Senator John Kennedy, the Louisiana Republican, that previously, regulations had barred anyone who engaged in bestiality “on either side of it.”
“Either side of what, the bestiality?” asked Kennedy. “So you disqualified the animal?”
“We have great canines, but we’re not going to disqualify them,” said Patel.
Is this real life or a god damn SNL skit? It reads like an SNL skit.
Scene opens on a group of new recruits wearing FBI uniforms.
Camera pans out, it’s an animal shelter.
Camera pans out further, the man speaking is Kash Patel in a gimp suit.
Here at the “Friends of Beastiality Institute”, we take not asking or telling very seriously, and my thing is definitely bleeeeep*
Scene cuts to disclaimer of no animals being hurt.
Disclaimer ends. As we return to the scene with the recruits, we see Kash zipping up his gimp suit.
“And that, my friends, was consensual.”
Cut to dog wearing a bee suit and smoking a cigarette…
“live from New York, Kash fucks dogs!”
Space Ghost: “So how was it working with Lassie?”
Triumph the Insult Dog: “If by worked with you mean ‘banged up the ass,’ it was great.”
SG: “Whoa. You can say that on TV? Huh, well I, too, once banged a dog up the a-”
technical difficulties message
SG: “Well how was I supposed to know I couldn’t say it?!”
… Moltar appears on-screen
“I thought I recognized you! We both were foced to hench for an obscure Canadian comedy group in 1997! How’s it meltin’, yo?”
The lunatics have taken over the asylum long ago.
those arent exact quotes btw. you can find video of the whole thing. patel explains that his team told him that there have been applicants that were sex trafficked and forced to do some things that might count as sexual acts with animals. apparently that what he meant by being on the other side of beastialty.
Yeah the actual reasoning given is, reasonable. Assuming they’re not lying (which is a massive ask for this Admin). And they’re communication about it is horrendous, but that’s to be expected from these dipshits. They’re not in these positions because they’re actually good at their job.
If he was telling the truth, they would have changed the rule by adding the word “willingly”. However, he was just lying to cover for the fact that they want to allow abusers of animals and women into the FBI.
It is an exact quote. https://x.com/atrupar/status/2099864817901125967 (a clip of the hearing, which I’m sure you’ve set up to redirect to your preferred Nitter instance)
you’re talking about a different part of the oversight hearing the article also covers
I wonder if they are looking at furries.
How do you start a fight between Kash Patel and JD Vance?
Or the weirdest Eiffel Tower.
No…I suppose it’s my fault for having eyes…
They seem like the Cleveland steamer type of guys
Or an escalation from the Epstein files. They have gotten all the underage rape they want, now they want to normalize beastiality.
They like dogs because the oldest ones are only 15.
excellent point. A tie in with the epstein files would explain this. If they were fucking kids at an industrial scale I bet they had animals too. So some rich bastards fucked some animals and now they want that decriminalized. Finally this makes sense.
When I first herd about the files, this was my exact thought. Some of the videos Ive been subjected to as an admin of furry stuff… Ain’t no regular person got the funds to support that bad behavior.
There are ghetto (KY trailer park dog sex rings) cases, but anything larger than a dog… There is an industry. That’s why rich people go to horse races, they are shopping.
This has become more culture war bullshit. People don’t genuinely care except that it’s a political football. Like, I’m sure if they stopped and thought about it, they could work up some tears, but that’s just not the part of their brain that is activated 24/7.
The following post didn’t make much sense until I saw this one further down the feed.
Thanks, OP, for keeping me sufficiently aware of the insanity to understand the memes.
The answer he was getting to is just as crazy. There were so many trafficked victims who were also forced into beastiality that ALSO want to be in the FBI there grew a need to update the policy. Like…what?
He can’t give out FBI jobs to his fraternity alumni because they all had to fuck a pig as part of the initiation.
The applicant pool is so narrow we had to consider this limitation. It’s sad applicants may have been forced to perform those acts either way though.
I deleted this part of my post…I can’t help but think this is one guy who wasn’t ever part of trafficking.
Because they’re only accepting applications from creeps they know.
If a woman who was forced into it by a gang wants to join the FBI to take these people down to keep other girls and women from having the same fate, why would you deny her?
Under the law, we do not criminalize or hold people to actions taken under duress. You can keep the policy and just qualify the action to having been done willfully. You don’t need to allow abusers in to open the door for victims.
And an abuse victim shouldn’t have ever been charged with it either.
Ok? Do you not understand the policy change? You are under the impression that willful beastiality is now allowed in the FBI? If you believe that, why do you believe that? Are you ok with having unreliable information?
He just said that the policy disallowed the fucking dogs who had been victimized. Are you expecting sensibility on these policies? Are you for real?
Yes I believe 1000% that whatever stupid excuse he gave for this policy change, it will be used primarily to put more unqualified, criminal, deviants into positions of federal authority. That seems to be this administrations bread and butter. Do you think that the Patel FBI who protects Trump and all the other Epstein abusers has high moral standards quality of its hirees? Come on.
Because that’s a strawman argument & doesn’t happen in reality.
You seem to know so much about it, are you an FBI recruiter or do you work with victims of human trafficking? Because unless you’ve done at least one of those things, I can’t see how you would have any knowledge from which to make such an assertion.
Giving fascists the benefit of the doubt is stupid & I refuse to do so. If Kash Patel told me the fucking sky was blue, I’d go outside to check.
So no, I don’t fucking believe them, and you shouldn’t either if you have more than two braincells to rub together. What I do know is there is at least one white supremacist group & one really nasty college club that are both reported to use bestiality as initiation rites to use the threat of blackmail to maintain control over their members. The only victims here in those cases are the animals.
Yes, I do believe you are that easily manipulated.
Fuck off, loser.
I actually don’t find it far fetched that people who were victimized may themselves want to prevent that from happening to others.
Me either, just that this specific item is so prevelant that we are having a public conversation around it. But also…I would have bias if this was my story which should preclude me from service. There is a specific person(s) that was part of the mass hiring recently that makes this current news is my guess. There is a name here.
Hr is trying to say people who fucked animals during hazing rituals are victims.
I feel like the framing of whether they are victims or not is kinda irrelevant. I just don’t want people who won’t say no to fucking animals just to get into a frat to have any kind of authority.
You know what, I particularly don’t want people who are willing to admit to fucking an animal during a job interview to work.
Not just at the FBI, kinda anywhere.
But if they’re not busy working they might be busy fucking animals.
Like how I don’t mind when trump plays a shit load of good.
Golf right? Bad golf at that. Bummer of a typo.
Yes, people who get hazed are victims of abuse. You can be both an abuser and a victim.
What’s really funny here is that they could have said something like “we condensed the questions using screening questions. Instead of asking about specific, uncommon, convictions we ask if they’ve been convicted of anything. This is to make the process more efficient.”
Or whatever.
But now, no one is going to believe that’s why, and everyone’s going to believe cash got shagged by a horny goat.
That wouldn’t have been as useful as a distraction from the Epstein files and/or various looting and power grabs going on.
Only people with learning disabilities will think that.
Maybe he was forced to. You know, he’s a victim.
If you watch the full thing they removed the restrictions for vicims according to Patel. Apparently someone was forced to engage in such acts against their will.
Honestly the US is so crazily stupid now. And that cones from someone who lived through Brexit and Boris Johnson as prime minister of the UK.
We are living in the stupidest timeline.
We are living in the stupidest timeline.
Careful, there’s a 50/50 chance that every time somebody says that, the stupidest timeline gets stupider.
Maybe I shouldn’t have quoted it.
Nah, it’s the most corrupt & greedy timeline…maybe.
The stupid people in charge are a feature, not a bug.
I get that’s what he’s trying to say. But that still doesn’t make sense to me. Because if someone was trafficked and forced to engage in those acts against their will, wouldn’t that situation come up in whatever trial put that on their record? And if someone was in that circumstance, do they still get charged with beastiality despite the fact that it was completely non consensual on their part? That seems wrong to me. Especially if, as he also tried to imply, it happened when they were a minor. If that is the case, I think he should be pushing for the laws around that to get changed, rather than the FBI hiring guidelines.
But to me this whole thing reeks of a hastily thought up shitty excuse. Because even if it is actually the case, that minors who are trafficked and forced into beastiality against their will still face charges for it, how frequent is it that people in that very specific scenario are also actively applying to the FBI? And if it is one specific person they were trying to make exceptions for, why not make an exception specifically for that person instead of opening up the guidelines as a whole. It’s just so stupid and incompetent. But what else can you expect from Kash Patel.
That seems wrong to me.
Newsflash, there is a lot in this world that isn’t fair.
There are a lot of government requirements like these and they rarely allow for any considerations. It’s a yes or no, and the wrong answer is an instant failure with no recourse. There are plenty of other people applying without that disqualification. Whether it’s an excuse for their actual reasoning or not, it is a valid consideration that the current rules don’t allow for.
Ok hang on. I definitely understand that the world isn’t fair.
I’m not a lawyer. And I’m not really sure how to even go about looking this up, nor do I particularly want it in my search history. But are you saying that the current US law as it stands allows being convicted of beastiality simply by being a victim of force?
Because it’s not like they hook you up to a magic lie detector and ask if you’ve ever participated in beastiality. They are asking if you have been convicted of said crime. Which is something they can look up and verify. And I would assume said conviction would require a court case. With a decision by a judge or jury. And so during the case, if you make the argument that you were trafficked/forced into it you still face charges?
And if that isn’t how the law works, then we would be talking about cases where somebody was forced into that situation, but was unable to prove that they were forced in court, and were wrongfully convicted. Then we are talking about an exception to an exception. And that just seems insane. Especially with the fact that the guidelines change is so broad and sweeping, rather than as granularly specific as the case trying to be argued here.
Again, I’m not a lawyer, and certainly not well versed in the laws regarding beastiality. Maybe there’s something I’m just missing. But I don’t understand how you could be added to a registry, or have something put on your record without some sort of conviction. And I don’t understand how you can be convicted of something if you were a victim yourself, and being forced to do something, especially as a minor.
The change is just making a yes answer not an immediate disqualifier. Meaning it’s still a question, and could disqualify you, but now you can provide that context.
The system gets shit wrong all the time. People are convicted for stupid shit all the time. Texas famously just convicted a group of people recently for terrorism for being at an ICE protest and having Anti-fascist flyers.
Relying on the system to always have an authoritatively correct and accurate decision without any room for context is ridiculous, and that’s what the old policy was.
Oh good lord. That antifa conviction was not a “letter of the law” accident. It was the most intentional twisting of statute to go after maga’s “enemies” that we’ve seen yet.
As for the beastiality requirement, that could have been changed with the word “willingly”, without letting in whatever nasty boys ole’s toad eyes wants to let in.
Disclaimer: I’m not trying to argue with you, I’m just trying to wrap my head around this.
I get that it shifts it from being an immediate disqualifier. But then we’re right back to the issue at the start. A “yes” to that question means there has been a conviction. And while yes, the system gets things wrong all the time, especially given the example you cite, why are they specifically making this carve out for beastiality? Like you said, people were wrongfully convicted of terrorism for attending protests. There are plenty of felony convictions that can be incorrect or unjustified or biased. And I’m assuming those felony convictions would also be an immediate disqualifier for employment at the FBI. So it’s really weird for them to act like beastiality is a unique charge where these sorts of things can happen . Which makes the whole excuse bullshit.
There’s a cognitive dissonance here that I just can’t explain away as anything other than just blatant excuses with no real basis. If the argument is that sometimes convictions can be wrong and there can be extenuating circumstances, then that should be applied wholesale. And there shouldn’t be any immediate disqualifiers without having a discussion with the candidate. If they’re willing to accept convictions for other crimes as gospel because the judgement came from the system, then the same should apply to beastiality.
The fact that this specific carve out is being made (I know that there are other guidelines being relaxed as well, but it’s not across the board, they are choosing a handful of specific things) really does just make it seem like no matter what justifications Patel provides he really just does support/like/excuse beastiality.
So they accommodated a very small minority of people? 🤔
Kash Patel is implementing DEI at the FBI!
I didn’t say it was right or wrong
We have confirmed reports of the Israelis forcing Palestinians to do this shit right now. These aren’t hypotheticals.
A single person being outright denied without any consideration to context, like trafficked individuals forced to commit these acts against their will (the reason given for the change), is an injustice. Telling someone that they can’t even be considered because of trauma they had no control over is ridiculous.
It’s reported that Israel does this to prisoners.
They hire the animals like horses etc? I don’t believe this.
Kash fucked a dog huh?…
Or a dog fucked him…
You’re all missing the bigger picture, with FBI agents being placed at polling stations they need this to - say it with me - RAT FUCK THE ELECTION!
No troops at polling places is a very important part of the
constitutionUS code If the US government is going to use the FBI as a thumb, it should remember that a hand has 4 fingers.I’m confused about what you expect to happen?
Well, Yakko… that’s a very Yakko thing to say.
Ask Wakko, he knows.
Very coy, good job. That would go over great on tiktok, but this is lemmy. You can just talk about attacking cops if you want, you get more points that way too :D
I attack with words, not fists or bullets.
Yet refuse to say what you mean, something’s clearly being lost in translation. Could you just sock it to me?
Brem: I’m a psych major! Words are my weapons!
FBI Agent: I’m a FBI Agent. Weapons are my weapons.
A hint:
Dot is cute and Yakko yaks. Wakko packs away the snacks While Bill Clinton plays the sax
Kash: Someones gotta fuck those animals. No kink shame
Anyone reasonable: do you really need to find people who fuck animals though?
Kash: How else will do we replace the mounted division with a centuar division with out the JTRHNBR people? Checkmaate liberals!! drops mic showers self with tallboy of Fosters
“We have great canines, but we’re not going to disqualify them,” said Patel.
I just keep thinking Furry Bureau of Investigation.
I never did before… but for the rest of my life, I will read “FBI” as “Furry Bureau of Investigation”
Fuwwy BOwO of In-what’sthis?
Jesus, is this what even qualifies as a distraction now? If gas prices keep going up Kash may end up sucking off a llama in front of Congress.
I would feel sorry and embarrassed for the llama.
This hasn’t been in the news (I’ve seldom seen this in reputable places other than Wired), so it’s an ineffective distraction if so.
How else could they hire more conservatives?
