Passing CIA/FBI/DEA polygraphs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright, I guess I'll ask a follow up question: Suppose I hypothetically used marijuana recently, is there a real downside to me lying and saying I haven't?

I wonder if they would even do a polygraph on a freshman who is doing an internship? I think the answer is probably no, but I'm sure it varies by agency. You are very young, and when I was in college, all internships were done during your senior year. Just remember, that whatever information you share with a fed agency, they may very well share that info with another agency.

Like a pp said, the main purpose of the polygraph is to put pressure on you so that you confess. But don't underestimate how difficult it can be to out-smart someone who does this day in and day out. I know many people who have done it, but why take the risk? Some of these drug use policies are antiquated, but that's just the way it is. I would probably lay off the weed for a good 2 years prior to employment and hopefully you can talk to people who work at these agencies so that you can get a better idea of what you want to do. After finishing college, I found out very quickly that perception can often have little to do with reality. Also, 1811 positions used to be somewhat competitive, but are pretty good gigs.

DEA polys for intelligence and agents. There is a drug use questionnaire for everyone.

[Anonymous]

My squeaky-clean cousin had such a hard time with the poly. He ended up failing a couple times and almost gave up on his dream career. I have no idea why- he never did drugs, never even drank alcohol until 21.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just don’t lie and you’ll be fine

That isn’t good advice. The whole point is to get you to overtell on yourself. Things that they aren’t even directly asking. Don’t over share. Answer but don’t go beyond the question. When they ask follow ups of anything else to tell us don’t go searching for things that aren’t what is being asked.

The machine can’t detect lies. That is not the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My squeaky-clean cousin had such a hard time with the poly. He ended up failing a couple times and almost gave up on his dream career. I have no idea why- he never did drugs, never even drank alcohol until 21.

The poly detects is you have a conscience.

[Anonymous]

I’ve never understood the “don’t lie” assertion.

Let’s say you smoked pot a handful of times with only 1-2 people who you know seem equally wholesome as you. Assuming the investigation even uncovers these particular people and talks to them, what if you know there is no way in hell that they’d say you ever smoked pot (or that they do either)?

If you did it with a sibling, for instance, or your spouse or best friend, or even just a friend, and you know none of them is going to admit to smoking with you.

[Anonymous]

In general the poly is not so much a lie detector. It is more of a way to detect "deception". You can be deceptive without being a liar. People are very good at putting on masks. But once you enter into a lie or try to make a story that is not representative of who you are or what you have done, it becomes more and more work to maintain the initial lie, story, or face saving strategy. You have create new deceptions or representations to protect the initial deception. This builds up stress and eventually shows on the poly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright, I guess I'll ask a follow up question: Suppose I hypothetically used marijuana recently, is there a real downside to me lying and saying I haven't?

I wonder if they would even do a polygraph on a freshman who is doing an internship? I think the answer is probably no, but I'm sure it varies by agency. You are very young, and when I was in college, all internships were done during your senior year. Just remember, that whatever information you share with a fed agency, they may very well share that info with another agency.

Like a pp said, the main purpose of the polygraph is to put pressure on you so that you confess. But don't underestimate how difficult it can be to out-smart someone who does this day in and day out. I know many people who have done it, but why take the risk? Some of these drug use policies are antiquated, but that's just the way it is. I would probably lay off the weed for a good 2 years prior to employment and hopefully you can talk to people who work at these agencies so that you can get a better idea of what you want to do. After finishing college, I found out very quickly that perception can often have little to do with reality. Also, 1811 positions used to be somewhat competitive, but are pretty good gigs.

CIA does polys for everyone. You can’t work at CIA without a full-scope lifestyle polygraph. Doesn’t matter if you’re a freshman doing an internship or an adult applying for a full-time job. Everyone does the poly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with all. Don’t do it again moving forward and do not lie. Remember they will also be conducting a background investigation so the potential of identifying separately that you have done drugs or drank underage is likely to be uncovered.

Be honest.

They're not going to care if you drank underage, as long as you aren't an alcoholic right now.

OP is a college freshman. The aren’t going to care about the 30yr old who drank underage ten years ago. They may or may not care about the 18yr old currently breaking the law who tries to lie about it.

Be honest. Hiding things is what makes you potentially open to blackmail or coercion and that’s what they are trying to uncover.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never understood the “don’t lie” assertion.

Let’s say you smoked pot a handful of times with only 1-2 people who you know seem equally wholesome as you. Assuming the investigation even uncovers these particular people and talks to them, what if you know there is no way in hell that they’d say you ever smoked pot (or that they do either)?

If you did it with a sibling, for instance, or your spouse or best friend, or even just a friend, and you know none of them is going to admit to smoking with you.

If you don’t understand the principle “don’t lie,” then you shouldn’t have a clearance. Period.

All SSBIs involve “developed sources.” That means they find people you didn’t list as references and who might not be willing to keep your secrets. Think neighbor who filed noise complaints on you, coworker who didn’t like you, college roommate you fought with, and so on. There’s a decent chance one of these people will turn over something that will get you in trouble. If you told the truth, it might be “mitigable.” If you lied, it’s an instant disqualification for any clearance for at least five years, possibly for life (this can be a judgment call for the investigator or committee). Taking the risk is stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never understood the “don’t lie” assertion.

Let’s say you smoked pot a handful of times with only 1-2 people who you know seem equally wholesome as you. Assuming the investigation even uncovers these particular people and talks to them, what if you know there is no way in hell that they’d say you ever smoked pot (or that they do either)?

If you did it with a sibling, for instance, or your spouse or best friend, or even just a friend, and you know none of them is going to admit to smoking with you.

If you don’t understand the principle “don’t lie,” then you shouldn’t have a clearance. Period.

All SSBIs involve “developed sources.” That means they find people you didn’t list as references and who might not be willing to keep your secrets. Think neighbor who filed noise complaints on you, coworker who didn’t like you, college roommate you fought with, and so on. There’s a decent chance one of these people will turn over something that will get you in trouble. If you told the truth, it might be “mitigable.” If you lied, it’s an instant disqualification for any clearance for at least five years, possibly for life (this can be a judgment call for the investigator or committee). Taking the risk is stupid.

You sound like a typical uptight fed. "developed sources" WTF are you talking about? Listen, the whole thing is a game. I know well over a dozen people who lied their ass off on polygraphs and have now been working in fed and local law enforcement for many, many years. You wouldn't know that because you think that you catch everyone. You only catch the idiots who aren't savvy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never understood the “don’t lie” assertion.

Let’s say you smoked pot a handful of times with only 1-2 people who you know seem equally wholesome as you. Assuming the investigation even uncovers these particular people and talks to them, what if you know there is no way in hell that they’d say you ever smoked pot (or that they do either)?

If you did it with a sibling, for instance, or your spouse or best friend, or even just a friend, and you know none of them is going to admit to smoking with you.

If you don’t understand the principle “don’t lie,” then you shouldn’t have a clearance. Period.

All SSBIs involve “developed sources.” That means they find people you didn’t list as references and who might not be willing to keep your secrets. Think neighbor who filed noise complaints on you, coworker who didn’t like you, college roommate you fought with, and so on. There’s a decent chance one of these people will turn over something that will get you in trouble. If you told the truth, it might be “mitigable.” If you lied, it’s an instant disqualification for any clearance for at least five years, possibly for life (this can be a judgment call for the investigator or committee). Taking the risk is stupid.

Cool story, bro. Friends sound like winners too.

You sound like a typical uptight fed. "developed sources" WTF are you talking about? Listen, the whole thing is a game. I know well over a dozen people who lied their ass off on polygraphs and have now been working in fed and local law enforcement for many, many years. You wouldn't know that because you think that you catch everyone. You only catch the idiots who aren't savvy.

[Anonymous]

Just hack the test. Easy to do
Google it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What happens to the other clearance you have when you fail a POLY? Let's say you have TS currently but failed a poly for the higher one. Do they just take the TS away from you then?

I think you should be fine with the other clearances. You do have to answer it correctly when they ask " have you ever been denied a clearance before".

I am curious about this too. I guess they can't take away a lower level clearance if it was given by some other agency with a separate investigation. May be they could, I am not sure.

[Anonymous]

The first thing they will ask is if you did any research in how to pass. Be honest and say you made this post. It’s not a big deal, everyone does some research. But now stop researching it, it’ll only make you nervous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The first thing they will ask is if you did any research in how to pass. Be honest and say you made this post. It’s not a big deal, everyone does some research. But now stop researching it, it’ll only make you nervous

LOL PP! Only an idiot would do that. Polygraphers want you to spill your guts, as that is how they get you to fail. Very few people have failed because their chart looked bad. But LOTS of people have failed because they caved under pressure from the polygrapher.