Hr is trying to say people who fucked animals during hazing rituals are victims.
Even if they had legitimate reason for the remove the bestiality rules, what about soliciting sex? Surely theres no defense for that?
How else could they hire more conservatives?
Or an escalation from the Epstein files. They have gotten all the underage rape they want, now they want to normalize beastiality.
Kash fucked a dog huh?…
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.
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?
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.
“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.
I wonder if they are looking at furries.
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?"
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.
The lunatics have taken over the asylum long ago.
How do you start a fight between Kash Patel and JD Vance?
Or the weirdest Eiffel Tower.
The body is talking about no longer barring trafficking victims who were forced against their will to perform sexual acts with animals. It's pretty obvious one should not bar the victim from a job.
The only 'not the onion' part of this article is the title which does not make the facts clear.
Are you somehow under the impression that victims of sexual abuse are convicted of the felonies perpetrated against them?
The policy was to bar FELONS, as is the case at any law enforcement agency.
The article repeatedly states this is about sexual victims. It doesn't use the word 'felon' a single time. Not only that, it even points out that those convicted of such crimes are still not eligible for employment.
new FBI hiring standards are aimed at protecting “victims of bestiality.”
“Applicants who have engaged in bestiality means they were victims of bestiality because they were forced to do so,” replied Patel. “At this FBI we are not going to criminalize and prevent victims from serving.”
multiple individuals have been disqualified from applying for the agency because they were victims of human-trafficking-related bestiality.
he FBI has had a number of applicants in previous years who suffered sexual abuse in their past, causing questions about prostitution, bestiality, or other similar issues to affect their background check process through zero fault of their own. Previously, those applicants would be barred from consideration. Now they can be considered.
It is false to suggest criminal behavior like this is no longer disqualifying at the FBI—any applicant who has engaged in criminal sexual acts like those referenced would of course not be eligible for employment, and it is ridiculous to suggest otherwise.
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.
It’s reported that Israel does this to prisoners.
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.
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 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?
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.
Only people with learning disabilities will think that.
That wouldn’t have been as useful as a distraction from the Epstein files and/or various looting and power grabs going on.
This is what happens when you elect a degenerate, he'll bring other degenerates to positions that they would never have gotten in a normal situation.
Why would human trafficking victims be denied a job a the FBI? He is talking about trafficked individuals who were forced against their will into sexual acts with animals.
he’ll bring other degenerates to positions that they would never have gotten in a normal situation
If you truly believe victims are degenerates, you need to go work on yourself before sharing opinions on the internet.
The idea that such victims exist is a stretch. That is to say ones that were forced into bestiality as children, sought out a career in the FBI, and were rejected upon revelation that they were victims. The first two conditions I would expect to be vanishingly rare, and that last one should nail the coffin shut. I don't believe a functioning FBI wouldn't be able to make exceptions for agents that would be qualified if not for conditions far outside their control as children.
Far more believable that Kash has sex with animals and wanted to hire his buddies.
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!
Frat bros with weird initiation rituals now free to apply, Skull and Bones come on down.
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
Posts must be:
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!