I don't understand this. Does he have a buddy who got caught fucking a goat and wants to work for the FBI but can't because they're a goat fucker, so Kash is dropping the beastiality disqualifier so his friend can work there? His reasoning seems odd, and while I'm not rejecting that some people have been victims ofremoved by animals, and nor am I shaming them, it seems like something the bureau could allow if the person is otherwise a good fit. Or, you know, keep the disqualifier and just amend it to exclude the victims he claims to be helping.

I never thought I'd have to consider this, but fucking a couch is more ethical than kids or animals

How do you separate a newly hired fbi agent from a sheep?

Answer: with a crowbar

so am i wrong in understanding that what kash patel is trying (and obviously not succeeding at, he's one of the worst rhetoricians the language has seen) to say is that someone who was specifically a child victim of a bestiality related sex crime is currently barred from being an FBI agent? and that this has come up in hiring processes prior so they're trying to change this language? idk, i didn't watch the MR coverage, i've just seen this particular grilling this morning without further commentary.

I found a YouTube link in your post. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:

• yewtu.be
• inv.nadeko.net
• yt.artemislena.eu
• piped.video