Disaster Kash Patel Is Polygraphing FBI Staff to Find Out if They’re Being Mean About Him - "YOU BLOODY BASTARD BITCH, KINDLY DO NOT SLANDER ME, I AM BRAHMIN SAAR"

Kash Patel Is Polygraphing FBI Staff to Find Out if They’re Being Mean About Him [archive]
The Trump loyalist has subjected dozens of his own team to the lie-detector test.

By: Ewan Palmer, The Daily Beast
Published: July 11th, 2025 at 8:22 AM ET

7V4DGFEMM5BQ3DTVLBYLWXZYO4.webp

FBI Director Kash Patel is making bureau staff take polygraph tests to root out anyone who’s been talking trash about him, according to a report.

Patel has ramped up the FBI’s use of the lie-detector tests—often deemed too unreliable to use as evidence in criminal courts—in order to keep tabs on his own people and stamp out leaks.

But according to The New York Times, senior officials and agents are also being strapped to the machine and grilled on whether they’ve “cast aspersions” or said anything negative about Patel and his leadership.

AVVG4MW3GVFQPN37V7ZPIVGRHU.webp
Kash Patel is seemingly becoming less trusting of his own FBI staff as the Bureau’s polygraph test usage increases.

The aggressive use of polygraphs is fueling an increasingly distrustful atmosphere inside the FBI under Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino, which has already been rocked by mass layoffs and the targeting of agents involved in criminal cases linked to President Donald Trump.

Agents have expressed concerns that they are at risk of losing their jobs if found to have said anything even remotely critical about Patel or Bongino.

“An FBI employee’s loyalty is to the Constitution, not to the director or deputy director,” former veteran FBI agent James Davidson told the Times. “It says everything about Patel’s weak constitution that this is even on his radar.”

Dozens of FBI officials have reportedly been subjected to polygraphs under Patel’s leadership, though it’s unclear how many were interrogated specifically about bad-mouthing the boss.

2JOZ73SMGFFFLIO43MLFNUG2LE.webp
Agents said being disparaging to FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino could also cost them their job.

One employee who was put on administrative leave during the Trump-era purge was brought back just to be grilled on the polygraph. Others were forced to take the test as Patel tried to find who leaked a story to the press that he wanted a service weapon, despite not being an agent working in the field, according to the Times.

One top FBI agent, Michael Feinberg, who worked the field office in Norfolk, Virginia, resigned after he was threatened with a polygraph test over his friendship with Peter Strzok, a counterintelligence official who was fired from the Bureau after sending disparaging text messages about Trump.

Strzok, who played a major role in the FBI’s probe into whether Trump’s team conspired with Russia to intervene in the 2016 election, was among Patel’s notorious “deep state” enemies list that appeared in his 2023 book, Government Gangsters.

In a July 3 post on the Lawfare blog, Feinberg said he would have been expected to “grovel, beg forgiveness, and pledge loyalty as part of the FBI’s cultural revolution brought about by Patel and Bongino” during his polygraph test.

While inadmissible in court, federal security agencies often use polygraph tests for internal investigations and during the security clearance process.

The Times, citing unnamed sources, said the rampant increase in polygraph tests is the latest example of the FBI becoming more “vindictive and extreme,” with officials becoming less trusting of each other as certain factions within the Bureau have “embraced snitching.”

The FBI declined to comment to the Times, citing “personnel matters and internal deliberations.” The Bureau did not immediately respond to a request for further comment from the Daily Beast.
 
Like I said in another thread, the modern government drone thinks they have the power and duty to be insubordinate to their direct superiors for personal reasons and then use the Constitution as a shield, claiming either free speech or an even higher "I won't obey unlawful orders" level that they don't have in the first place as non-uniformed non-UCMJ personnel.
And I'm absolutely certain most of those same people think Snowden is a traitor 🤡🌏
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coldgrip
I mean, its needed:



This type of thinking, by the way, shows either a complete lack of understanding of the separation of powers, or is a wilfully disingenuous way to excuse flat out insubordination to infuse partisan politics in whats supposed to be apolitical positions. Not one fed employee who has said this yet has been an actual judge. So yeah, root them out. They've never faught back against any other administration like they have Trump's, even WITH all of the unconstitutional orders (like the IRS targeting the tea party or student loan forgiveness). It's time they actually become apolitical or die.
You might not need to be loyal to the leader, but to the authority the leader represents. Which I'm sure many aren't, so ask what they think of the boss it's somehow relevent.
 
Oh wow… So there are bad consequences of politicizing the FBI? It wasn’t supposed to be like this!

It was supposed to be just one Russia witch hunt! Who could have foreseen that it would end in political factions inside the bureau and internal cleansing once the the guy the bureau was used against took over?!
 
Why do a polygraph? It's been common knowledge now for a while that polygraphs are inaccurate and easy to fudge if you know what your doing. If there's a solid chance joe normie knows that then a fed would absolutely know that about the so called lie detector
 
Last edited:
Why do a polygraph? It's been common knowledge now for a while that polygraphs are inaccurate and easy to fudge if you know what you’re doing. If there's a solid chance joe normie knows that then a fed would absolutely know that about the so called lie detector
It still holds some psychological fear in a lot of people’s minds despite the truth they are pretty fake. Good way to throw people off their game
 
Why do a polygraph? It's been common knowledge now for a while that polygraphs are inaccurate and easy to fudge if you know what your doing. If there's a solid chance joe normie knows that then a fed would absolutely know that about the so called lie detector
Most on-the-street people actually don't know that. But only because the polygraph has really fallen out of favor if not into obscurity due to the fact it's not only beatable but grossly inaccurate even when someone is being honest to the point it's practically pseudoscience. The big collapse of them as legit tools of investigation came back in the late 80's/ early 90's when the tabloid/talk show trash circuit used them to "prove" people guilty of things like Satanism and sexual abuse that the accusers later admitted were all made up. Mostly by having the victim "pass" one while telling a wild story, ergo, they MUST be telling the truth that they were abducted by a UFO and sexually abused by bigfoot!

A lot of it's usage is because of legacy regulations inside law enforcement and government bureaucracy that were drafted in the 60's where it was seen as the next big thing (like AI is today) and thus you can, in some cases, be subject to disciplinary measures if you refuse one, even though its results will be such utter junk they won't be admissible in court.

If anything, seasoned LEOs know a "failed" polygraph is only good as a tool to pressure someone into a false confession, so polygraphing your fellow cops is the low point of expecting to get anywhere while still "investigating".
 
Why do a polygraph? It's been common knowledge now for a while that polygraphs are inaccurate and easy to fudge if you know what your doing. If there's a solid chance joe normie knows that then a fed would absolutely know that about the so called lie detector
A few reasons:

The polygraph subject is under oath and recorded, so anything they say can be used to fire them later. They will get fired for non-cooperation if they don't play along so they can't stay silent, they have to engage with the interrogator for hours and usually something actionable will come out. And there is no real limit on how long someone can be polygraphed; it just gets broken up into multiple days and recorded as a single polygraph exam for statistical purposes.

Relevant questions can be ambiguous and agencies can use this to their advantage. If the subject of the exam interprets the question wrong (or even if they're technically correct) and answers no before the test, then says something after the test that could be construed as an admission, they can be fired for lying.

The comparison questions are often expected-lie questions. These are ambiguous, highly-stressful questions that may involve deeply personal events at any time in one's life. So you either give up all kinds of embarrassing dirt and potentially get fired for that, or you lie and potentially get fired if they happen to know the truth (e.g. you said you never stole from the FBI, but two people said you took a pen home). Either way, it gives them a reason to fire someone.

And while a polygraph subject can talk to a lawyer, they can't have a lawyer in the room with them. If you're an FBI interrogator, that's your dream scenario: essentially no right to remain silent, no lawyer, virtually unlimited access to your subject, the subject cannot meaningfully challenge the "evidence" that you produce.

Finally, the FBI is probably the dirtiest polygraph agency in the federal government. If they want you to fail, you will fail.

A lot of it's usage is because of legacy regulations inside law enforcement and government bureaucracy that were drafted in the 60's where it was seen as the next big thing (like AI is today) and thus you can, in some cases, be subject to disciplinary measures if you refuse one, even though its results will be such utter junk they won't be admissible in court.
The official reason given by Clapper et al. is that polygraph exams get disqualifying admissions that regular background investigations don't. Maybe that's because polygraph examiners ask questions that aren't asked in normal background investigations?
 
They should force every FBI employee to write an appreciation letter to Kash Patel and then ask Grok whether each one is sincere or not that seems like a needful way to figure this out
 
Back