they're probably already covered for that

Can you ELI5 how an automatic disqualifier based on a conviction that doesn't account for whether or not someone is a victim doesn't automatically disqualify those victims without just saying they're "probably already covered"

Edit to add: I don't see the relevance of what person C says if person A and B aren't going to be taken at their word, either. Durbin's words on the topic matter only as much as anyone else's in a vacuum, and his claim as to what is and isn't currently policy is as meaningless as anyone else's if it's unsubstantiated