Bob Schwartz

Tag: FBI

September 15, 2026

Applicants can now become FBI agents after explaining how their committing bestiality was forced on them.

Senator John Kennedy questioned FBI Director Kash Patel about new FBI hiring policies.

Nothing short of the entire article from The Hill will do justice to the absurdity we now face as American citizens. Or as human beings.

GOP senator presses Patel on FBI policy change: ‘Why would you get into bestiality?’
by Rebecca Beitsch – 09/15/26

It’s not a topic often discussed in the halls of Congress, but Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) grilled FBI Director Kash Patel as he said he was just “trying to understand” a recent change in policy regarding bestiality.

The line of questioning on Tuesday was sparked by a shift in FBI hiring practices which lifted longtime bans on selecting new trainees if they have engaged in prostitution or bestiality.

The FBI has argued the changes were needed in order to not automatically disqualify a prospective agent who may have been forced into such scenarios through human trafficking.

But Kennedy said he was confused by the matter, asking on “what planet” this was suggested.

“We’re having a tough time attracting agents, good quality agents that we all can trust, because so many people, fairly or unfairly, think that in order to be an FBI agent now, your political point of view matters. Why would you even get into bestiality?” he asked.

“We are not into bestiality,” Patel responded with a slight smile.

Kennedy is known for adopting an unassuming posture during questioning that can be both effective and humorous.

“When you saw bestiality — I say this with respect to the person who recommended it — why didn’t you just say, ‘What planet did you parachute in from? Why do I want to lead with my chin and get into bestiality?’” Kennedy asked.

Patel acknowledged he had some reservations.

“That was my initial response, senator. But they then explained to me and showed me cases in which people were forced into it and had applied to the FBI, and so I thought they should be considered. It’s not an automatic disqualification. That’s all,” the director said.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) earlier this week flagged concerns over the policy change, noting that the shift included not just animal cruelty, calling both “extreme conduct.”

“These are not minor technical adjustments. They represent a considered decision to open the Bureau’s ranks to individuals who engaged in conduct that the FBI previously treated as disqualifying,” he wrote, noting that the shift in allowing those who had hired prostitutes comes from an agency designated to battle human trafficking.

Kennedy throughout the exchange had queries on the specifics.

“So… it’s not if you frequented a prostitute. It’s if you were a prostitute. If you were forced into it,” he said, before seeming skeptical about the same scenario applying to bestiality.

“Obviously, we are never going to hire the criminal,” Patel said, later joking “We have great canines.”

“So you disqualified the animal?” Kennedy asked, later adding “How do you involuntarily do [bestiality]?”

Patel said trafficking can involve all kinds of disturbing practices.

“In a lot of these cases, when human traffickers, who are some of the worst individuals on planet Earth, they don’t just traffic you for prostitution; they traffic you for degrading acts of all kinds, and they force you into that type of conduct,” he said at one point during the exchange.

“But you’re not telling us today that if a human being had sex with an animal, that they can still be an FBI agent,” Kennedy asked towards the end of his line of questioning.

“No,” Patel responded.

Leave a comment
September 29, 2018

The Hopeful But Limited Relief of Having the New Kavanaugh Investigation

It is good news that there will be a new FBI investigation in the Brett Kavanaugh matter. Any movement towards a return to free, open and lawful democracy is welcome.

But before we pop champagne and release balloons, a reality check. Here are some ways the investigation could have little effect on the outcome—in fact, will be designed to have little effect, besides providing cover for vulnerable and/or spineless Republicans.

1. It is a limited investigation. We don’t know the scope, which is being directed by Trump. It could be as narrow as the single incident alleged by Christine Blasey Ford, the incident that was the subject of Thursday’s hearing. This could mean simply talking to her, to Brett Kavanaugh, and to the few people who were there—only one of whom, Mark Judge, is an eyewitness.

Judge has already said that as an effect of his chronic alcoholic blackouts, going back to high school, he has no memory, one way or the other, of the incident. There is no reason he won’t say the same thing to the FBI.

The investigation could be broader. It could include other allegations that have been made. It could include everything that Ford and Kavanaugh testified to during the hearing. It could thus involve Kavanaugh’s claims about his benign behavior, claims that have been refuted by a number of people who knew him in high school and college. It could include all this, but almost certainly will not.

2. Trump controls the report of the investigation. Trump ordered the investigation. His order presumably included a specific scope of investigation for the FBI to follow. Just as importantly, the report of the investigation will go directly to Trump, who can decide how much of the investigation report can be shared and who it can be shared with.

The worst case, which would not be surprising, is that no copies of the report will be distributed. Instead, senators will be allowed to review the report in the White House. They may be allowed to take notes.

All of this—any presidential redaction and any restricted distribution—are part of the desire by some for this investigation to be “confidential”…

3. The investigation is, in some unspecified way, supposed to be “confidential”. Judge has said he wants whatever he says to be confidential. Kavanaugh has indicated he expects it to be confidential. It is unclear what this means functionally. But it is easy to see the case that would be made:

The only reason we are doing this investigation is to further inform the senators responsible for deciding on confirmation. Others, whether other members of Congress or citizens in general, may be curious, but they have no compelling reason to see the detailed report, given that it contains sensitive information.

If that reasoning sounds extreme, that is, extremely suspect, it is. But if you need a basis for it, just look at the “investigation” that went into Kavanaugh in the first place, and look at the history of the Trump administration. No twisted attempt at hiding the truth is too absurd.

Leave a comment