FBI Director Kash Patel Waived Polygraph Security Screening for Dan Bongino, Two Other Senior Staff
www.propublica.org
As the FBI’s deputy director, Bongino receives some of the country’s most sensitive secrets, including the President’s Daily Brief. His ascent to that position without passing a standard bureau background check is unprecedented, insiders say.
  • e̶t̶t̶y̶b̶l̶a̶t̶a̶n̶t̶@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    53 minutes ago

    Well that’s ridiculous! Next you’ll tell me he also waived the uniform mood ring requirement! Preposterous. Well, I guess if he asked a magic eight ball what to do about the polygraph screening, and it said not to give them to senior staff, then that’s just science and we need to trust science.

  • Carnelian@lemmy.worldEnglish
    16·
    3 hours ago

    I mean I don’t agree with him giving special treatment to his buddies, but why is the FBI wasting time on polygraphs, which are a totally debunked pseudoscience?

    Says in the article they started using them in ‘94…in ‘98 the supreme court ruled that these ‘tests’ were inadmissible in court. Because even back then it was proven that it’s impossible to determine the truth via polygraph at a rate better than simply flipping a coin.

    My only guess is they might ding you on the polygraph if they already learned something through less than legal means, but it’s preposterous to think anyone making it into the FBI would be unfamiliar with the uselessness of the test itself

    • GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      2 hours ago

      It’s more about probing specifically where to look if you want to find dirty laundry when looking for security-clearance candidates. They don’t assume you lied when you said you didn’t do hard drugs, but your body did react to that question deliberately in a way that suggests maybe we should look into a history of drug abuse before we accept you reading about sensitive topics.

      Or sexual scandal blackmail waiting to happen is a great way to get… state secrets… in the… hands of… Oh hey, they raided Mar a Lago, lookit that…

      • Carnelian@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        56 minutes ago

        They don’t assume you lied when you said you didn’t do hard drugs, but your body did react to that question deliberately in a way that suggests maybe we should look into a history of drug abuse

        You mean subconsciously?

        Other than that, I guess I just don’t know what you mean about that, where they don’t assume you’re lying but it gives them a hint that they should go investigate it. Like, why else would they investigate it based on the reaction unless they thought the reaction meant something, you know?

    • bulwark@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      2 hours ago

      Polygraphs are useful in that you can claim the test subject is lying about anything you want. They’re using it as leverage more than “fact finding.”

      • Carnelian@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        47 minutes ago

        For cops interrogating like a random dude they suspect of a crime, have a little evidence on, mix in some questions they already know, etc. yeah I can see it. Part of the broader interrogation, maybe the machine really is just adding some pressure.

        But for a job interview at a three letter agency? I mean who isn’t aware of the truth of these machines at that level? There really isn’t any interrogative leverage if both people know it’s a carnival game, and it’s illegal to hold it as leverage against them in any further proceedings