Kash Patel Explains… This?

I just did an off the cuff piece. Can you believe this? Sometimes I can't believe what's going on in Washington right now. Take a listen to this. Senator Durbin presses Kash Patel on a July statement that the FBI is losing qualified candidates to old requirements, asking whether people who stole from employers, solicited sex, or engaged in bestiality count as qualified candidates. Patel responds that the change does not qualify perpetrators, it stops automatically disqualifying victims of trafficking from applying, and the same rigorous standards still apply. He points to recent hires as proof standards have not dropped: 307 former law enforcement and military officers, 470 with advanced degrees, 448 fluent in multiple languages. Senator Kennedy pushes further, asking what specifically changed. Patel explains the old regulation automatically disqualified anyone who participated on either side of prostitution, bestiality, or trafficking, applicant and offender alike. The change removes automatic disqualification only for people who were themselves trafficked or forced into those acts, not for anyone who engaged in them voluntarily. I really can't stand this guy, John Kennedy, playing the small town lawyer bit. Ivy League graduate acting like he wandered in from some rural courthouse. It's the whole routine. But I have to say, he's not entirely wrong with his line of questioning. Of all the things we're worried about and prioritizing right now, they're spending a hearing on this. I don't know that a trafficker forcing someone into an act with an animal would even count as bestiality, I think you'd call that something else. But do we actually have this problem? Are there that many FBI applicants with this kind of background that it's tightening the pool enough to justify changing the rule? I don't know, man. Sometimes I think, folks, we're cooked.