U.S. national security agencies are using enhanced tactics in an effort to find whistleblowers and stop leaks of sensitive information to news outlets. Former intelligence officials reportedly say it has led to an environment of high-anxiety, as many fear their jobs may be on the line, as well as potential prosecution.
What new tactics are authorities using?
Now, under FBI Director Kash Patel’s orders, the bureau is using polygraph tests otherwise known as “lie detectors” to weed out anyone it believes may be leaking information detrimental to Trump administration operations, as first reported by The Washington Post on Monday, April 28.
The new employment of polygraph tests had previously gone unreported, but a spokesperson told the Post, “The seriousness of the specific leaks in question precipitated the polygraphs, as they involved potential damage to security protocols at the bureau.”
When asked to offer specifics or expand on the leaked information in question, the spokesperson declined further comment.
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
What else is the administration doing to stop leaks?
The move follows Attorney General Pam Bondi’s fresh legal directives advising the Department of Justice to subpoena journalists’ personal communications. The DOJ has also widened the criteria for potential legal action against leaks of not only classified information, but “privileged and other sensitive” material that the Trump administration deems is “designed to sow chaos and distrust” of the government.
What are employees saying?
However, officials warn, the broader scope of the administration’s efforts could include information the administration sees as discomfiting, or as out of line with its policy.
A former FBI field office head told the Post, “Morale’s in the toilet.” Other sources offered the same sentiment to the Post and many said, even within the Pentagon, military leaders are echoing the words of the administration over fear of being fired.
Officials say things worsened after the firing of Gen. Timothy Haugh, who led the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command. His firing also came in the wake of dozens of Department of Homeland Security cybersecurity agents’ layoffs and early retirements. Those within the agency reportedly warned that their departures mean U.S. cybersecurity is now at risk from Moscow, Beijing, North Korea and Iran-based cyber criminals. Haugh’s dismissal drew heavy criticism from Democratic lawmakers.
The Pentagon has also faced forced departures recently, including several of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s top aides. Their departures followed reports that Hegseth was angered by leaks to the news outlets that involved “sensitive communications” with long-time Pentagon officials.
Departures, firings and now polygraph tests have created “a culture of fear,” according to one former official. Some officials within agencies are reportedly avoiding contact with journalists over concern for their jobs or prosecution.
Laura Loomer’s role
The move by some U.S. intelligence agencies to employ “lie detector” tests follows a call from Trump-ally Laura Loomer for National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard to “polygraph every single intelligence employee” in an effort to “clean house” of leakers, particularly those who served under President Joe Biden.
“Why are we waiting for something bad to happen?” Loomer wrote on X.
Gabbard recently announced her agency provided criminal referrals connected to a number of leaks, and vowed cooperation with the U.S. Department of Justice to help find and charge leakers. The DOJ has not yet elaborated on the potential prosecutions.
What do experts say about polygraphs?
Intelligence scholars, however, say polygraphs are not truly “lie detectors.” Steven Aftergood, who specializes in intelligence policy and served with the Federation of American Scientists, told the Post that lie detectors test more for stress rather than lies.
“They are stress detectors. If for any reason the questions being posed are upsetting to an individual, your pulse might accelerate, even if you’ve done nothing wrong. So polygraphs do not measure truth or falsity. They measure stress,” he said.
Aftergood added that polygraphs are susceptible to false readings, either positive or negative, citing an example of former CIA agent Aldrich Ames passing a pair of polygraph tests despite serving as a spy for the former Soviet Union. Ames is currently serving a life sentence.
What has the Trump administration said?
The Trump administration has defended its previous efforts against the source of leaks, arguing it’s fighting to end what it deems the “weaponization” of law enforcement it said was pursued under former President Biden.
President Donald Trump’s personal defense lawyer John Lauro, previously said, “We now see no political prosecutions, no fake grand jury proceedings, but instead a way of looking at the Department of Justice in terms of restoration and ensuring the rule of law will be carried out going forward.”
