OK we all had a laugh over Kash Patel’s “bestiality’ grilling by Sen. John Kennedy. Alas, no one in media or politics drew two blatant conclusions. First Kennedy has joined a few other Republicans (very few) in trying (tepidly) to open some daylight between himself and the Trumpian-fecal calamity.
But especially that Patel might have an actual reason to forestall any firing or dismissal of FBI officials for having sex-with-animals.
Bear with me on that!* Both of those conclusions tie directly to a word I’ve repeated – ad nauseam – for years. A word that’s THE fundamental trait of today’s GOP.
In his first administration (45), Trump appointed largely from fringes of the GOP elite establishment. Folks like Barr & Tillerson whose dedication to Don and corrupt oligarchy was real, but not boundless. The ‘grownups’ in that first-term cabinet still had limits to what they could stomach. And so, one by one, nearly all of them finally turned on Trump, publicly calling him idiotic and insane.
That should have ended this nightmare! It didn’t, because we are in a full phase of the U.S. civil war, a recurring fever when confederate culture overlooks all facts and can rationalize anything.
But put that aside…
…because when Trump regained office, he made one vow. “This time no grownups!”
And there are none. No appointees who might question his bizarre impulses or constitutional betrayals. Above all, none who could walk away, while publicly disavowing or denouncing him. The one criterion for a cabinet or other appointment in Trump v.2 (47) is loyalty.
(The other trait of every Trump appointee – jibbering idiocy on a par with his own – is an epiphenomenon of that loyalty. They go together.)
So far, I’ve said nothing new. Others comment that one-way loyalty (he never reciprocates) is his sole demand. What no one out there appears to grasp is that this kind of loyalty cannot derive only from dogma or ego. Nor from mere corruption. All of those are SATIABLE! Sooner or later, the henchman - like Tillerson or Barr etc. - can say ‘enough!’
Trump realized there must also be palpable, fear-inducing coercion. Duress is backed by something that he lacked in the first term… a sense that every appointee must fear their master's vengeance and his wrath.
== CAN YOU list methods of coercion? ==
In the restored USSR of Vladimir Putin, this is easy to accomplish, by setting a few examples. Monthly, another of Putin's fellow “ex” commissars - or some failed general - tumbles from a window or takes polonium tea. That won’t work in the USA… yet. (Sure, there's Epstein and a couple of other strange ‘suicides’ or accidents or the 'silenced' Pennsylvania shooter. But it’s not a principal method over here. Not yet.)
For years I’ve asked folks to envision what kind of coercion would enable Trump to ensure absolute loyalty from appointees. Loyalty we’ve seen to be utterly pervasive across the cabinet, the Congressional GOP and rightwing media. Other than threats of violence and death, there’s just one method left. One that Russian security services have been expert-at for 150 years! Using honeypot lures to entrap westerners (generally males) into complete control. The word is Blackmail.
I’m no longer alone pointing this out. For some months, a few others have used this word to describe one way today’s GOP could be herded into lockstep obedience, as the most tightly disciplined political movement in U.S. history. (I invite anyone to say – in comments – who else in media is talking about this.) Recall that THREE former GOP members of Congress have described or alluded to republican “orgies” in D.C? Full Eyes Wide Shut perversion-fests from which no participant could leave without getting unexpected and unwelcome souvenir photos. Images that will go to spouses or media, if they don’t toe the line, forever after.
Yes, a very few Republicans are edging away from Foxite control. Some are female (e.g. MTG). Others may be too old to have orgied (John Kennedy?), or are retiring from public life (Massie). Or else – like Mike Johnson – they are so driven by dogmatic hate that no coercion is needed. Then there may be just a few who have a smidgeon of residual decency and patriotism - enough to defy the blackmailers’ orders, as I depicted here, in the opening of a novel about all this.
(If you suspect a friend is being blackmailed, have them read that scene!)
Nevertheless, a few blurry pics from a dimly lit orgy aren’t enough kompromat for Trump's needs. Especially since it’s trivially easy and far less expensive for him to secure even better kompromat, perfectly, from every appointee.
And now I must ask you to STOP SHRUGGING OFF WHAT’S OBVIOUS!
Yes, there is a way that Don – a former casino owner mob boss – could have done this with trivial ease. And yes, it will circle back to Kash Patel.
== How can this NOT be what he says? ==
“You want an appointment to my cabinet? Or to run a federal agency? A position that a third-rater like you would never otherwise qualify for, in a million years? Fine. Give me leverage over you, so I know you’ll never betray me. And that you’ll do anything I ask!”
Can you see it yet? Envision a casita in a far corner of Mar-a-Lago… or maybe a rented warehouse in Palm Beach… that’s equipped with high def cameras run by a couple of loyal henchmen. And waiting there, in front of the cameras, is… a donkey.
Oh! You’re groaning now? Disgusted? Then let me ask, which part of this is unlikely? How is this not THE logical solution to Donald Trump’s problem? Exactly the coercion that quickly and cheaply meets his needs?
No person of top qualifications would comply, of course… which is why no top qualified person exists in his cabinet. Just dopes who saw one chance in all of their pathetic lives to become somebody of power and significance. And all it takes is one hour in a closed room, providing kompromat that gives your beloved boss an absolute guarantee of loyalty. Just a few high-def photos of you performing an act of…
STOP it!
Stop shrugging this off as an author’s notion for a thriller plot, or a farfetched bit of perverted imagination.
Try to actually wear your enemy’s shoes for a bit!
Picture Donald Trump’s desperate need, after re-election – and how this trivially, at almost zero cost, solves his problem. Gobs of motive, means and opportunity.
And so, we return to Kash Patel’s seemingly weird attempt to eliminate bestiality as automatic cause for disqualification from the FBI. Because it could have the effect of preventing automatic dismissal of many of his recent hires and promotions, at some moment when they are desperately needed to help enforce...
And now, will YOU offer up a refutation, of any kind? Tell us now (in comments) whether you have even a glimmer of another explanation for it?
No. This 'bestiality-thing' was no trivial/amusing side-quirk.
It was a pragmatic move of actual importance, aimed at preserving leverage.
Especially in case a Democratic Congress starts holding hearings, offering immunity and shining light on hidden mass perversions that are entirely consistent with the obedient, disciplined, unsapient, undead thing the Republican Party has become.
Go ahead. Snort and dismiss, as step-by-step these predictions all come true.
But I promise - these notions are being considered by those minds who ponder cause and effect in newly-logical ways and who do not shrug everything off, as you do.
They have no shoulders to shrug. Those AIlien Minds.
==========
PS *Did I say “Bear with me” re this topic? ;-) argh.
==========
PPS... per presidential orders, let's change the title of my book!
Note that Sen. John Kennedy was in Iowa last week, doing what perspective POTUS-wannabe's all have to do. His "break" with Trump is aligned with a potential run at the big office. But his vote to confirm RFK Jr. is indicative of John Kennedy's character more than any posturing of doubting Trump.
ReplyDeleteRegarding blackmail, I agree that there may be sex-stuff in the GOP dossiers. Maybe even the "B" word that you are tying back to the head of the FBI.
I also believe, from personal lived experience, that many high-up GOP operatives and politicians have been associated closely with organized crime, mostly Russian or Israeli, for a couple of generations now. It was certainly true in the 90s in New York and New Jersey. I think this mode of coercion is more prevalent than the sex stuff.
Now, why did Patel remove the requirement?
In FBI counter-intelligence polygraph testing, "B" was one of the questions asked. So was contact with organized crime, which should be much more concerning that "B" if my guess about the prevalent nature of GOP / DoJ blackmail is correct. But given the relationship between the FBI and various mafias, it may be easier to explain away contact with a mob than it is to explain "B."
"Tell us now (in comments) whether you have even a glimmer of another explanation for it?"
ReplyDeleteCertainly there's another explanation. It's the one that Kash Patel has offered, that "we did not want to punish victims of bestiality, victims who were trafficked".
Previous standard disqualified anyone who had acknowledged engaging in bestiality. The revised standards, as I understand it, relax this for people who has done so involuntarily.
You presented a scenario of someone being recorded in the act for blackmail purposes. It seems plausible that traffickers might do exactly the same thing. Someone who had been a victim of sex trafficking and had escaped from it might be motivated to join the FBI to fight against it. It's reasonable that such a person shouldn't be disqualified for something they were forced into. Perhaps there was an actual applicant who triggered the change in requirements (if so, I hope they wouldn't say anything that might reveal who that person is).
And consider this. If you were using bestiality as blackmail, would you reveal that fact by mentioning it in the publicly available FBI job requirements?
I'm not saying that Kash Patel is telling the whole truth about this. I never make that assumption about anyone in Trump's circle. But I don't see any real evidence that he isn't.
There's another part to this. What if they go into that room and then balk at what they're being told to do? Nope. The alternative has to be *worse*, and it's not hard to imagine. They have two choices, neither of which is backing out and forgetting the whole thing. They can either go through with this, and pretend that the cushy job with near-infinite grift opportunities makes up for the shame of ever getting into that situation, or suffer physical harm to themselves or their families. Maybe that's why some of them are drunk all the time.
ReplyDeleteBut Keith Thompson also raises a good point. Why, indeed, would they tip their hand like this? They're clearly not afraid to thumb their noses at any law or regulation, and they practically always get away with it because of the others they've already compromised. My guess is that it was a humiliation ritual to warn Kash that his incompetence and public antics had put him close to the edge. Force him to endure the questions - as a punishment, as a renewal of his loyalty oath, as a possible example to others. No wonder he always looks scared.
ReplyDeleteAnd waiting there, in front of the cameras, is… a donkey.
Maybe back in 1965 when John Brunner published 'The Squares of the City', engaging in sex with a donkey made a shocking blackmail-worthy plot device, but no longer, ever since the politically progressive left decided to normalize & celebrate every sort of sexual perversion associated with the 57+ approved gender flavours, up to & including the homosexual practice of sodomy, the furry practice of yiffing, the broney practice of clopping & the MAP practice of pedophilia.
Have you already forgotten the social media posts of uniformed Biden Era Military personnel in bondage gear & dog masks, resulting in moral outrage & Trump's 2024 presidential victory?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/12/12/sexually-explicit-photos-soldiers-investigation/10881795002/
This is the particular scandal to which Kash Patel's awkward comments were referring, I believe, even though Patel's awkwardness is right up there with Rick Santorum's rather infamous 2015 attempt at tolerance by comparing Bruce Jenner's transgenderism with "man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be.”
It therefore follows that allegations of a little bestiality are now rather 'meh' by modern morally relativistic standards, especially when our increasingly woke MSM only becomes outraged by 'Allegations of Traditional Heterosexuality' because Patriarchy.
Best
The hurdle to accepting your hypothesis lies in imagining someone so craven as to abase themselves in this manner, and then accepting that there are many willing to do so.
ReplyDeleteOf course, lots of people just want to be led and, in cases where 'insurance' is deemed necessary, it's easier to set the mark up with a spiked drink first.
Another thought: a bully's relationship with projection, and the recent rant by a Republican senator from Alabama about the airline industry being overrun with 'furries' suggests referring to him as 'Tommy Teletuber' would strike a nerve.
Perhaps no animals were harmed during filming?
Keith T. Sorry that is just plain drivel. Victims of any crime generally get a pass from culpability for the crime. It's true that raped women suffered horrible following persecutions in many cultures. But the scenario you describe is simply absurd. Anyway, it can be dealt with by making is a general RULE that crime victims are presumed innocent of the crime. You don't even remotely answer the question of WHY BESTIALITY in particular?
ReplyDeletePlatypus yes, Once you enter the room with the donkey, they'd likely add threats of violence. Good point. So? As for your other point, note that dismissal from the FBI would be pretty much AUTOMATIC if the kompromat were released. They may imagine a situation where they can tough things out, otherwise.
locum's riff is especially tepid and lame, this time.
Tony seriously? A drunken fifth rate Fox shill facing career collapse is offered Secretary of Defense... and he wouldn't jump into that room?
I haven't read the FBI documents that spell out the qualifications for applicants, either before or after the recent changes. I don't know the scope of the changes. If those documents are available, perhaps someone could post a link. I found this, but it doesn't go into much detail and doesn't discuss any recent changes: https://fbijobs.gov/eligibility#fbi-eligibility
DeleteApparently there was an explicit rule that anyone who committed bestiality could not become an FBI agent. I wonder how long that rule has been in place.
You asked for "even a glimmer of another explanation". That's what I gave you. Will you acknowledge that?
I *speculate* that the previous rules disqualified anyone who had participated in bestiality, and more recently someone realized that that could disqualify victims as well as deliberate perpetrators. Why bestiality in particular? Quoting a CNN article: "The FBI previously automatically disqualified people who acknowledged engaging in crimes including prostitution or bestiality" -- so it's not *just* bestiality. Patel's critics saw a reference to bestiality and focused on that (and Patel did not deal with it well).
The alternative, that the FBI forces candidates into bestiality for blackmail purposes, that no candidate has every publicly said anything about this practice, *and* that they changed their publicly available written qualifications to allow for that, is far less plausible.
I found something.
Deletehttps://fbijobs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-03/Special_Agent_FAQ.pdf
This is a 4-page PDF from 2023 describing the requirements for FBI Special Agents. It lists "Engagement in prostitution or bestiality" as an automatic disqualifier, along with things like "Drug use while holding a clearance". I haven't see an updated version.
You seem to be suggesting that the published requirement was relaxed for the specific purpose of making it easier to blackmail FBI job applicants using the room with a donkey and a video camera.
I don't put any trust in Patel's explanation, but I'm generally in favor of removing the old character judgements that Hoover thought should apply. Sure. That B perversion is pretty icky, but the point of questioning possible agents with content like that is to detect people who can already be blackmailed. Hoover superimposed a purity test on that and called them the same, but they aren't.
ReplyDeleteI'm not inclined to give Patel any credit for cleaning up the residues left by Hoover either. Perhaps there is a lower level actor quietly at work who has managed to get Patel to think he owns the concept. It wouldn't be the first time something like that happened in the civil service.