Kash Patel's Deception: Stop Believing Polygraphs-Science Unmasks the Real Lies

The Jack Hopkins Now Newsletter #314

Hypocrisy isn’t partisan. It’s universal. It’s a human being thing, not political. Wherever you find human beings…you’ll find examples of hypocrisy.

And you know what else is universal? The bullshit in the polygraph industry. So, let me break down…plain and simple…why those lie-detector machines are about as reliable as a weather forecast in a thunderstorm.

An FBI spokesperson said that, at Director Kash Patel’s instruction, the bureau has begun using polygraph exams in recent weeks to “pinpoint the source of information leaks.”

Here’s the BIG Problem: These are Often Called Lie Detector Tests…and They’re Nothing of the Sort

Worse yet, Kash Patel knows this. Even worse? Polygraphers (the people who administer the Polygraph Test)…know it better than anyone.

What a Polygraph Actually Measures

A polygraph DOES NOT sniff out lies.

You get hooked up to sensors that track sweat, heart rate, breathing, and blood pressure….all stuff that jumps around when you’re nervous.

The machine then compares your readouts during “control questions” (like “Is your name John?”) to “relevant questions” (“Did you steal that money?”).

Big changes get flagged as deception. Seems scientific, right? But it’s a bit like judging a poker player by how sweaty their palms get…totally missing the fact they might just be holding a hot cup of coffee. It’s all based on a lie.

Anyone telling you that a polygraph is a “lie detector,” is…is telling you a lie; they are being deceptive. And that…is supported by facts, not some antiquated and unreliable “hocus pocus” machine.

The Science

The 2003 National Research Council report reviewed 57 studies and concluded that while polygraph readings can sometimes distinguish deceptive from truthful responses better than chance…the underlying metrics (especially blood pressure and electrodermal activity) are influenced by too many variables to isolate deception reliably.

Also, do you know what “better than chance” means in this setting? anything over 55%. That’s right. You could flip a coin and be damn close to as accurate as a polygraph result when assessing whether someone is lying. Donald Trump, stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

Even under ideal lab conditions, accuracy ranged from 55% to 99%, with wide confidence intervals; friend, that’s hardly the “gold standard” many claim.

No Unique “Lie” Signature

Here’s the Kicker: Your Body Reacts to Stress, Fear, Anger, Embarrassment, Excitement—Any Strong Emotion—Exactly the Same Way.

Try telling a big lie…and you might sweat or breathe funny. But start thinking about your kid’s car accident, and your heart races just the same.

A 2003 National Academy of Sciences review found that there’s no specific physiological pattern that only shows up when you lie.

In other words…polygraphs are measuring “baggage”…every emotion you pack…then guessing whether you’ve smuggled a lie in there.

The Science

Meta-analytic work on the Comparison Question Test (the most common polygraph format) found a mean effect-size of only 0.69, indicating substantial overlap between liars and truth-tellers on physiological measures.

In many datasets…innocent subjects exhibited stronger reactions to “relevant” questions than guilty subjects…simply because they were anxious about the test itself…not because they were concealing wrongdoing.

False Positives and Negatives Run Rampant

Because polygraphs rely on shaky comparisons…they spit out false positives (innocent folks labeled liars) and false negatives (guilty liars passing as saints) faster than a farm boy chewing Sunflower seeds on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

Studies show false-positive rates anywhere from 15% to over 40%; again, that’s like flipping a coin to decide if you’re truthful.

False Negatives are Common Too:

Seasoned criminals or trained “countermeasures” users can skewer the test by biting their tongue…tensing muscles…or doing mental math to keep their readings flat. Poof….liar or innocent, you choose.

The Science

In the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case United States v. Scheffer (1998), the majority noted “no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable,” equating its accuracy to “little better than could be obtained by the toss of a coin.”

That was the United States Supreme Court using the “flip a coin” metaphor.

Subsequent circuit courts echoed this skepticism.

The Office of Technology Assessment research in 1983 predicted that in real-world screening…where deceptive rates are lower…the error rates would spike even higher…warning against reliance for security clearance decisions.

People Differ Too Much

Imagine one guy who’s calm as a monk and another who’s jittery like a squirrel on espresso.

Same harmless fib…but the squirrel’s gonna look guilty. The monk breezes through.

Science calls this individual variation: a fancy way to say polygraphs can’t handle real people. Even the American Psychological Association warns that polygraph accuracy is “insufficient” for anything but entertainment. ENTERTAINMENT.

Yet Uncle Sam still uses them for background checks on spies. Yes, you read that correctly. If they’re so shaky, why trust them with national secrets? WE SHOULD NOT.

The Science

Research shows baseline autonomic activity differs drastically across individuals; some chronically anxious people show high electrodermal responses even at rest, while others barely perspire under stress.

A large-scale review found that when studies controlled for baseline variance… polygraph accuracy plummeted by 20–30%…demonstrating that without individualized calibration, the machine is blind to human diversity.

Countermeasures Defeat the Machine

Want to beat a polygraph? It’s not rocket science. Squeeze a rubber ball in your free hand during control questions, do mental puzzles, or force yourself to tense leg muscles. Any trick that spikes your baseline readings scrambles the “lie” algorithm.

Private polygraph operators know these tricks…and many teach them in “prep sessions.” The whole thing becomes a game of cat and mouse: “Detectives” looking for lies, “suspects” learning to lie better. Spoiler alert: the suspects often win.

The Science

The National Academy of Sciences explicitly noted that simple physical countermeasures can reduce detection rates by up to 50%. Yet no polygraph protocol reliably detects such tactics.

In controlled experiments…subjects instructed in countermeasure techniques passed detection at rates comparable to truthful controls…rendering the test effectively useless against informed exam-takars.

Real Harm, Real People

I’ve seen good folks get blacklisted because a polygraph “said” they lied…even when every other test passed.

Security clearances revoked, careers derailed, reputations smashed…all on the say-so of a machine that can’t distinguish “I’m scared” from “I’m lying.”

That’s not justice; that’s gambling with people’s lives.

And don’t get me started on how politicos trot out polygraphs to score sound bites; “I passed the test, so trust me!”….while quietly gutting campaign-finance laws.

The Science

A Wired exposé on law-enforcement polygraphs recounts cases like Christopher Talbot…a decorated officer who failed a routine polygraph during a hiring process despite impeccable earnings and service records.

Subsequent review revealed examiner bias and inconsistent scoring thresholds. Yet, the department refused to reinstate him.

Stories like these underscore that the human and institutional costs of polygraph “errors” far outweigh any supposed benefits.

Why We Need to Let Go

Look, I’m all for accountability; we need ways to sniff out real betrayal.

But polygraphs? They’re a relic of a misguided belief that human truths can be boiled down to spikes on a screen. We wouldn’t use a magic 8-ball to pick a Supreme Court justice…so why use a polygraph to decide if someone’s honest?

We deserve better tools: rigorous interviews, corroborating evidence, real forensic science….methods grounded in facts, not fear.

The Science

Emerging alternatives…like speech-stress analysis and fMRI lie-detection…still struggle with the same fundamental issues: emotional confounds…individual variability…and ethical quandaries.

A 2014 Harvard Neuroscience symposium concluded that no current technology reliably maps deception without invasive and context-bound setups.

Until we develop methods that meet standard scientific thresholds…peer-reviewed validity, replicable error rates <5%, and resistance to countermeasures….we need to retire polygraphs from serious use .

I no longer vote Republican because there is no longer a Republican party. That’s a fact. You can wrap glittery foil around a dog turd and call it a jewel…but it’s still a dog turd.

Hypocrisy, however… isn’t left or right; it’s the common enemy. And polygraphs? They’re the deck-stackers of lie detection…rigging the game against truth.

So the next time you hear someone talking about Polygraph/lie-detector test, realize you are hearing the equivalent of sticking a broom handle in a horses ass to determine if it is prone to erractic behavior. The results will tell you nothing reliable.

The person in question already knows it will cause the horse…any other animal…or any human being…to behave erratically. It doesn’t detect erratic behavior; it creates it.

Regarding Kash Patel and/or the Trump administration, since I am educated on the truth about polygraph test reliability…I’m not buying what they’re selling. You shouldn’t, either.

The Science is Quite Clear

No polygraph result in history has ever proven that someone was lying. Never.

It may later turn out that the person being tested was lying…and the initial polygraph result might have indicated the same…but it was more of a coincidence than anything.

Scientifically, one might say there was a correlation. In statistics, correlation measures how closely two variables move together.

It does not, however…prove anything other than two things occurred at, or near the same time. That’s it.

Two things happening together doesn’t mean one causes the other; there may be a hidden factor, or it could be coincidence.

A Polygraph Test Never Proves a Lie. It Doesn’t Have that Ability…Period. It Doesn’t.

Our democracy…and our sanity… depend on demanding real answers, not carnival tricks.

The Trump administration offers us a compendium of carnival tricks and other side-show, con-man tricks of the trade. That’s really all it is…a carnival:

It’s like one of those small town carnivals that packs up after being there a week…with all the flashing lights, music and smells of cotton candy, popcorn and shitty hotdogs… that then drives the big trucks out leaving nothing but ruts in the mud, the smell of piss…and trash (mostly cigarette butts) scattered about….as they head down the highway to do the same damn thing in a different small town. You get the idea.

That’s it for the moment. I’ll talk to you again real soon!

Remember…polygraph tests are on par with a plate of horseshit when it comes to detecting or proving a lie.

Best,

Jack