Secondly cashapp patel said that the animal would also not be disqualified
Specifically, he said that current laws automatically disqualify both victims and perpetrators of sex crimes. For instance, both a pimp and his trafficked prostitute get charged with crimes. Kash said the law currently targets both parties. The senator then turned that around and went “so in cases of bestiality, the animal is the other party? And the animal could be hired by the FBI?” And Kash basically went “I mean… I guess if you want to put it like that?”
In reality, if a trafficking victim is being forced into bestiality, the animal wouldn’t be the “other party” in this case. The other party would be whoever is forcing the victim into doing it. But the senator wanted their “Kash says FBI will hire rapist animals” soundbite, and Kash happily gave it to him because he’s a fucking idiot.
I dislike Kash, (he always looks like someone is slowly but steadily inserting hardboiled eggs into his ass, and he’s trying not to react to it), but as the above poster said, the actual reasoning behind the decision isn’t awful. Trafficking victims often get charged with sex crimes under our existing laws, because the laws don’t make a distinction between victim and perpetrator. If you get caught for prostitution, the law isn’t going to care that you were trafficked and forced into it. Which then makes escaping the situation even harder because those arrests will show up on a background check when they apply for jobs. In that way, the system is actually designed to keep the victim in sex work, because it’s one of the few ways they’ll have to make money after being charged with a crime.
I do appreciate the good faith take on the situation, and I’ll tentatively agree that being a victim of such an act should maybe not be immediately disqualifying, certainly scrutinized for trauma/blackmail purposes, HOWEVER with everything we know about the horrific shit people named in the epstein files have done who are currently in government or are directly connected with people in government, there is a non-zero chance that the FBI may in fact be training dogs to rape people.
I wish I could take the “this is just updating some outdated rules” defense at face value but I can’t, it really genuinely cannot take a single word any of the fascists in power say at face value. Everything that both Trump administrations have done has, in some way, hurt the common person, even the ostensibly positive changes like no tax on tips or no tax on overtime were not what was promised AND were used to push people off of assistance programs and into the donut gap between getting assistance and actually affording basic needs.
For real? Like literally, this is the hill you want to climb up and die on? Defending CashApp’s bestiality rules? If doing away with this rule was in anyway sound or logical at all, Asshat and his cronies wouldn’t be jumping over hoops to try to justify it?
Like even IF, EVEN IF his bullshit trafficking excuse is valid how many of these situations are ACTUALLY coming up?!
This genuinely feels like that meme where the dude me just standing there holding his dick in his hand and saying “uhhh AcTuALlY”.
To contribute my own corpse to the hill, the section of the rule specifically discussing bestiality existed long before the current administration. Their updating of the rules to be less absolute probably should have dropped the explicit callout entirely (because uh… guys, how often does that come up that it needs to be specified?? (real answer is that it’s an artifact from bestiality laws not being uniformly codified - which it still isn’t. for example, It was only made mostly illegal in Canada in 2019)) but it’s important context that this rule change wasn’t done in a vacuum, it was a pretty wide reduction in automatic disqualifications and this was among them.
It really does seem like this is just a flashy but bullshit distraction from all the other, much more heinous shit that’s going on.
“If [very unlikely bad thing istrue] then [that would be very bad]” is a very agreeable formula, but it’s not really a useful insight. Yes it would be bad if it were true, but the existence of a conspiracy theory with no supporting evidence does not reflect anything about the state of the underlaying system. If it did, the various 9/11 truthers, anti-vaxxers, Plum Island conspiracists, etc. would have a much stronger case for their nonsense.
Given the horrific contents of what is contained within the epstein files and how so many who are found in those files are in positions of power, genuinely the horrible things speculated cannot actually be dismissed as completely baseless conspiracy nonsense.
And trump has already put absolutely vile people into positions of power. He put a literal self admited puppy killer at the head of DHS, it would not surprise me if he also put a dog rapist as the head of the FBI.
Honestly, I don’t care enough to want to listen to how your conspiracy theory is different and totally justified (unlike all those other theories). The epstien files are what one would generally call evidence. And even then, despite being jam-packed with horrifying evidence, it is apparently not jam-packed enough with horrifying evidence to satisfy some people; this is where we get such lurid claims as satanic rituals, cannibalism, brainwashing and disposing of bodies in acid.
I am sorry the horrors the trump admin has wrought already aren’t enough for you, but they absolutely are enough for me. I don’t feel compelled to entertain conspiracy theories about how it could be even worse than we realize; wishful thinking about how cool it would be if xyz horrible theories were true is not a good use of our time. We should instead focus on the mountains of evidence going ignored in favor of dramatic yet baseless theories like this. The world sucks enough already - we don’t need to fantasize about how it could be worse.
Specifically, he said that current laws automatically disqualify both victims and perpetrators of sex crimes. For instance, both a pimp and his trafficked prostitute get charged with crimes. Kash said the law currently targets both parties. The senator then turned that around and went “so in cases of bestiality, the animal is the other party? And the animal could be hired by the FBI?” And Kash basically went “I mean… I guess if you want to put it like that?”
In reality, if a trafficking victim is being forced into bestiality, the animal wouldn’t be the “other party” in this case. The other party would be whoever is forcing the victim into doing it. But the senator wanted their “Kash says FBI will hire rapist animals” soundbite, and Kash happily gave it to him because he’s a fucking idiot.
I dislike Kash, (he always looks like someone is slowly but steadily inserting hardboiled eggs into his ass, and he’s trying not to react to it), but as the above poster said, the actual reasoning behind the decision isn’t awful. Trafficking victims often get charged with sex crimes under our existing laws, because the laws don’t make a distinction between victim and perpetrator. If you get caught for prostitution, the law isn’t going to care that you were trafficked and forced into it. Which then makes escaping the situation even harder because those arrests will show up on a background check when they apply for jobs. In that way, the system is actually designed to keep the victim in sex work, because it’s one of the few ways they’ll have to make money after being charged with a crime.
I do appreciate the good faith take on the situation, and I’ll tentatively agree that being a victim of such an act should maybe not be immediately disqualifying, certainly scrutinized for trauma/blackmail purposes, HOWEVER with everything we know about the horrific shit people named in the epstein files have done who are currently in government or are directly connected with people in government, there is a non-zero chance that the FBI may in fact be training dogs to rape people.
I wish I could take the “this is just updating some outdated rules” defense at face value but I can’t, it really genuinely cannot take a single word any of the fascists in power say at face value. Everything that both Trump administrations have done has, in some way, hurt the common person, even the ostensibly positive changes like no tax on tips or no tax on overtime were not what was promised AND were used to push people off of assistance programs and into the donut gap between getting assistance and actually affording basic needs.
For real? Like literally, this is the hill you want to climb up and die on? Defending CashApp’s bestiality rules? If doing away with this rule was in anyway sound or logical at all, Asshat and his cronies wouldn’t be jumping over hoops to try to justify it?
Like even IF, EVEN IF his bullshit trafficking excuse is valid how many of these situations are ACTUALLY coming up?!
This genuinely feels like that meme where the dude me just standing there holding his dick in his hand and saying “uhhh AcTuALlY”.
To contribute my own corpse to the hill, the section of the rule specifically discussing bestiality existed long before the current administration. Their updating of the rules to be less absolute probably should have dropped the explicit callout entirely (because uh… guys, how often does that come up that it needs to be specified?? (real answer is that it’s an artifact from bestiality laws not being uniformly codified - which it still isn’t. for example, It was only made mostly illegal in Canada in 2019)) but it’s important context that this rule change wasn’t done in a vacuum, it was a pretty wide reduction in automatic disqualifications and this was among them.
It really does seem like this is just a flashy but bullshit distraction from all the other, much more heinous shit that’s going on.
I mean, if there is a remote possibility the FBI is training dogs to rape people…thats some pretty heinous shit there too.
“If
[very unlikely bad thing is true]then[that would be very bad]” is a very agreeable formula, but it’s not really a useful insight. Yes it would be bad if it were true, but the existence of a conspiracy theory with no supporting evidence does not reflect anything about the state of the underlaying system. If it did, the various 9/11 truthers, anti-vaxxers, Plum Island conspiracists, etc. would have a much stronger case for their nonsense.Given the horrific contents of what is contained within the epstein files and how so many who are found in those files are in positions of power, genuinely the horrible things speculated cannot actually be dismissed as completely baseless conspiracy nonsense.
And trump has already put absolutely vile people into positions of power. He put a literal self admited puppy killer at the head of DHS, it would not surprise me if he also put a dog rapist as the head of the FBI.
Honestly, I don’t care enough to want to listen to how your conspiracy theory is different and totally justified (unlike all those other theories). The epstien files are what one would generally call evidence. And even then, despite being jam-packed with horrifying evidence, it is apparently not jam-packed enough with horrifying evidence to satisfy some people; this is where we get such lurid claims as satanic rituals, cannibalism, brainwashing and disposing of bodies in acid.
I am sorry the horrors the trump admin has wrought already aren’t enough for you, but they absolutely are enough for me. I don’t feel compelled to entertain conspiracy theories about how it could be even worse than we realize; wishful thinking about how cool it would be if xyz horrible theories were true is not a good use of our time. We should instead focus on the mountains of evidence going ignored in favor of dramatic yet baseless theories like this. The world sucks enough already - we don’t need to fantasize about how it could be worse.