I been lurking on these forums for a while now and I feel comfortable to post something.

Like most of you, I been a victim of the polygraph. According to my first polygraph test, it showed signs of deception when asked if I have committed a crime. I was quite shocked and nervous.


To make a long story short. I got a mail saying they are canceling the "Conditional Offer" and disapproval to be allowed access to classified information. And their reason for this decision was written all out of context from what I told them.


So I have 3 options:

1) "Request a copy of your investigative file"

2) "Request a review of the decision" which I write stating further details I can provide to overturned their decision.

3) Wait 1 year and re-apply or "you may file an appeal" after the 1 year passed.


I don't know what to do, any successful stories of making their decision overturned or is this some kind of false hope?

Should I go straight to option 2 and skip option 3? Because I know what I told them but I don't know what they have in file, and base on what they wrote to me is all out of context and I want to correct that. Or I just let this go and forget about ever applying anywhere else that requires security clearance because I'm screwed either ways?  :-/

Sorry to hear your story.  Which agency did you apply to?  Was it CIA?

I am a CIA reject.  I got the Conditional Offer of Employment (COE) and then "failed" my polygraph during my 3-day processing at the CIA Dulles Discovery Building (13900 Air & Space Museum Parkway, Chantilly, VA).  I got a certified letter a couple of months later saying I had been "denied access to classified information" and my COE rescinded.   I had a security clearance, have never been arrested, no criminal record, no drug issues, no foreign contacts, no security violations.  Yet, I'm some sort of security risk?

I went ahead a filed a Freedom of Information Act / Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) request, which came through with a copy of my background file.   There wasn't much there since the CIA didn't run my background check yet for my clearance.  All I really got was a copy of my SF-86 security clearance form and a completely censored copy of my polygraph report (the report was essentially blank pages with my name and occupation on the header, the polygraph info was redacted).  I requested a "review of the decision", hence an appeal, and it took 2 years before I heard anything.  My appeal was denied.  I was granted one final appeal which was also denied.  No surprise.  I have never heard of any applicant for the CIA successfully appealing their negative polygraph result.  It screwed my cleared career for a while but I eventually got hired by another agency and got my TS/SCI clearance, no polygraph needed in this case. 

The polygraph is garbage and they accuse EVERYBODY of something, usually crime or drugs or foreign contacts, to see if you'll confess to something they never would have found out about in the first place.  They have to reject a certain number of applicants to prove that the polygraph "works", which is doesn't.  You just drew a bad straw.  As did I.  Sucks for both of us.  I compare polygraphers to psychics, mere hogwash.

I would suggest you file a FOIA and appeal the decision, as I did, but don't expect anything.  Forget about it, and move on.  The appeal doesn't cost anything and at least you'll have on record that you did appeal and completely disagree with their decision.  That is the only advantage of appealing.  You can still have another good cleared career without these polygraph-agencies.  As for re-applying, I don't know.  I haven't found any stories online about people getting hired by the same agency that rejected them previously due to a failed poly, but I'm sure it does happen.

Thank you very much for that input. Yes, I am a CIA reject too. To this day, I can't sleep well from all that's transpired.

I'll go ahead and take your advice. I will share my response, in due time.

Anyone else who's reading, I would like to hear your advice too.

While I haven't personally applied for CIA employment, I concur with what "a cia reject" wrote. I'm not aware of a single case where an applicant for federal employment was later hired by an agency whose polygraph he or she "failed." That doesn't necessarily mean that there aren't any such cases, but if there are, it would seem that they are exceedingly rare.

KC1,
What is it that you told them during your polygraphs? What information led you to get rejected?

By the way, one thing I learned from my process is that I was denied SCI access by the CIA, not TS clearance.  But as far as the government is concerned, it is the same thing.  I was denied access to classified info. And if you have a clearance already, an Incident Report will soon be placed in your file, which is a negative red flag.

George is right.  I've never heard of anyone getting hired by the same agency where they failed the polygraph.  Another agency, yes, but that same agency, no.

Thank you George, I hope for the best.

@"a cia reject"

During the polygraph, I was accused of committing a "major" crime. I said, I tried hacking into the hackers group Anonymous the day before they took down the FBI website. They wanted to know my process, how it went about doing it. After telling them how and i also mention I did this with good intentions, for the greater good, that if i can locate and identified 1 of them, It could really give me a boost in my academic career.

My letter stated, I'm a member of Anonymous.

KC1,

This sounds like an egregious instance of "admission inflation," where a polygraph operator spins a minor admission into something disqualifying. Polygraphers have an incentive to do this because they are typically evaluated based on their post-test confession rates. Falsely branding you as a member of Anonymous allowed your polygrapher to inflate his or her stats. The claim that the CIA polygraph division prevented a member of Anonymous from infiltrating the Agency may also be used to justify future funding requests.

KC1 wrote on Oct 24^th, 2013 at 10:33am:

During the polygraph, I was accused of committing a "major" crime. I said, I tried hacking into the hackers group Anonymous the day before they took down the FBI website. They wanted to know my process, how it went about doing it. After telling them how and i also mention I did this with good intentions, for the greater good, that if i can locate and identified 1 of them, It could really give me a boost in my academic career. My letter stated, I'm a member of Anonymous.

Once a polygrapher accuses you of lying, he goes into a frozen-mind mode where he can hear only words that confirm the accusation.  All other information is filtered out.

Your mistake seems to be that you responded to his accusation with actual information.  Unfortunately your response included the words "hackers group Anonymous", "I tried hacking" and "took down the FBI website", with maybe "boost in my academic career" as a condiment.  Nothing else made it through his filter.

Never tell a polygrapher anything.  Polygraph sessions are unmonitored and unrecorded (they won't even let you have the chart), so when the Polygrapher lies about what you said, you have no evidence to counter him.

Giving him a hook to hang his lies on encourages him to think that you can be bullied.  It boosts his confidence and erodes yours, so that you don't even want to write the letter disputing his findings.

Aunty Agony,

One correction: Unless there has been a recent policy change, the CIA actually does record polygraph examinations. Retired CIA polygrapher John Sullivan documents this in his book, Gatekeeper. The FBI, by contrast, has a deliberate policy of not recording polygraph interrogations (a policy for which there is no good faith justification).

Thank you George.  I stand corrected.  Now I wonder if the policy of not recording poly sessions is as widespread as I thought.

KC1, sounds like you got screwed bad!   Sorry to hear about this.  The CIA recruiters are nice, but the security folks are evil rat bastards.   Their employees have to get polygraphed every 5 years, so I wonder what happens when a current employee "fails" their polygraph during their clearance review?  I wonder what happens when polygraphers polygraph other polygraphers?  Do they use the same ruse, knowing that they both know the "lie behind the lie detector"? 

George is right.  "Admission Inflation" is common not only with polygraphers, but also your security clearance background investigators (BIs).  I had something similar happen when I told an investigator something  minor, which was not illegal at all, but the investigator either misinterpreted what I said or just decided to spin it into making it sound like I had no regard for the law (it was all in my FOIA file).  This wasn't the reason for my employment rejection at that time, but I'm sure it did not help me.   One thing I learned is that polygraphers and BIs are not your friends.  They try to instill a false sense of friendship in you, warm you up, so you are open to talk about things.  They will smile when they meet you, shake your hand, maybe even crack a few jokes.  I bet your CIA polygrapher asked you things like, "how was your weekend?", "did you have a nice flight?".  If you are a guy, they may even talk to you about sports and all the pretty women working at the agency and in DC.  They best thing to do when having your polygraph or BI interview is to give short sweet yes/no answers.  Do not give any extra info.  Do not elaborate on anything unless asked.  You need to be that boring candidate who doesn't talk much.   The more you talk, the more your words can get twisted around and harm you.  It is similar to police interrogations.  "Anything you say CAN and WILL be used against you". 

Like I said previously, go ahead and FOIA your file and appeal, and then move on.  On the down side, expect that the info you have to the CIA to be shared with other agencies, so if you need a clearance for a job in the future, this incident will come back to bite you in the ass.

Admissions are what polygraphers strive for, it is like their gold star and they do a little celebration dance jig when they get them.  The polygrapher with the most admissions on their file gets bragging rights in the office.  Did the CIA make you sign any admission forms at the end of your polygraphs?

Thanks guys, I really got the bad hand here. it's such a shame the way how things are done.

Should I write and ask at the same time to send my investigation file and to review my case?

Or only do one? and which one.

KC1,

Filing a FOIA/PA request is an entirely different process than appealing your security denial.  Do both.  All you have to do more or less is write a letter to each office.  Your FOIA/PA file will come through in a few months.  Your security (SCI) denial appeal will take a couple of years at least, as mines did.  File both.  Neither costs anything but a postage stamp.

Did the CIA make you sign any confessions or other forms after your poly?

wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 11:08pm:

KC1, Filing a FOIA/PA request is an entirely different process than appealing your security denial.  Do both.  All you have to do more or less is write a letter to each office.  Your FOIA/PA file will come through in a few months.  Your security (SCI) denial appeal will take a couple of years at least, as mines did.  File both.  Neither costs anything but a postage stamp. Did the CIA make you sign any confessions or other forms after your poly?

How does one appeal their CIA security clearance denial?  Is that done through the same office that handles the FOIA/PA requests? :(

KC1 wrote on Nov 4^th, 2013 at 4:37am:

Thanks guys, I really got the bad hand here. it's such a shame the way how things are done. Should I write and ask at the same time to send my investigation file and to review my case? Or only do one? and which one.

Do BOTH.  You won't stand the remotest chance of reversing an Agency's adverse hiring decision, but making a PA request and then reviewing the (redacted)  BI reports you will receive may well shed valuable light on how and why your Agency application got fouled up.
At least, it helped me understand who caused my employment application to be  f*cked up. >:(

wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 11:25pm:

KC1, sounds like you got screwed bad!   Sorry to hear about this.  The CIA recruiters are nice, but the security folks are evil rat bastards.   Their employees have to get polygraphed every 5 years, so I wonder what happens when a current employee "fails" their polygraph during their clearance review?  I wonder what happens when polygraphers polygraph other polygraphers?  Do they use the same ruse, knowing that they both know the "lie behind the lie detector"?  George is right.  "Admission Inflation" is common not only with polygraphers, but also your security clearance background investigators (BIs).  I had something similar happen when I told an investigator something  minor, which was not illegal at all, but the investigator either misinterpreted what I said or just decided to spin it into making it sound like I had no regard for the law (it was all in my FOIA file).  This wasn't the reason for my employment rejection at that time, but I'm sure it did not help me.   One thing I learned is that polygraphers and BIs are not your friends.  They try to instill a false sense of friendship in you, warm you up, so you are open to talk about things.  They will smile when they meet you, shake your hand, maybe even crack a few jokes.  I bet your CIA polygrapher asked you things like, "how was your weekend?", "did you have a nice flight?".  If you are a guy, they may even talk to you about sports and all the pretty women working at the agency and in DC.  They best thing to do when having your polygraph or BI interview is to give short sweet yes/no answers.  Do not give any extra info.  Do not elaborate on anything unless asked.  You need to be that boring candidate who doesn't talk much.   The more you talk, the more your words can get twisted around and harm you.  It is similar to police interrogations.  "Anything you say CAN and WILL be used against you".  Like I said previously, go ahead and FOIA your file and appeal, and then move on.  On the down side, expect that the info you have to the CIA to be shared with other agencies, so if you need a clearance for a job in the future, this incident will come back to bite you in the ass. Admissions are what polygraphers strive for, it is like their gold star and they do a little celebration dance jig when they get them.  The polygrapher with the most admissions on their file gets bragging rights in the office.  Did the CIA make you sign any admission forms at the end of your polygraphs?

I think that you have hit the nail on the head here!
The CIA recruiters are very nice, and will promise almost anything.  Unfortunately they are NOT the ones who will be conducting or reviewing your BI.
Remember that the purpose of the BI is to dig up as much dirt on an applicant as is possible.  In the process, the a*sholes who do the field investigations will speak to any piece of slime whom they may encounter who claims to have knowledge about you.   You will NEVER have the opportunity to rebut or respond to any garbage about you that may be "uncovered" in the BI process. >:(

wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 11:25pm:

KC1, sounds like you got screwed bad!   Sorry to hear about this.  The CIA recruiters are nice, but the security folks are evil rat bastards.   Their employees have to get polygraphed every 5 years, so I wonder what happens when a current employee "fails" their polygraph during their clearance review?  I wonder what happens when polygraphers polygraph other polygraphers?  Do they use the same ruse, knowing that they both know the "lie behind the lie detector"?  George is right.  "Admission Inflation" is common not only with polygraphers, but also your security clearance background investigators (BIs).  I had something similar happen when I told an investigator something  minor, which was not illegal at all, but the investigator either misinterpreted what I said or just decided to spin it into making it sound like I had no regard for the law (it was all in my FOIA file).  This wasn't the reason for my employment rejection at that time, but I'm sure it did not help me.   One thing I learned is that polygraphers and BIs are not your friends.  They try to instill a false sense of friendship in you, warm you up, so you are open to talk about things.  They will smile when they meet you, shake your hand, maybe even crack a few jokes.  I bet your CIA polygrapher asked you things like, "how was your weekend?", "did you have a nice flight?".  If you are a guy, they may even talk to you about sports and all the pretty women working at the agency and in DC.  They best thing to do when having your polygraph or BI interview is to give short sweet yes/no answers.  Do not give any extra info.  Do not elaborate on anything unless asked.  You need to be that boring candidate who doesn't talk much.   The more you talk, the more your words can get twisted around and harm you.  It is similar to police interrogations.  "Anything you say CAN and WILL be used against you".  Like I said previously, go ahead and FOIA your file and appeal, and then move on.  On the down side, expect that the info you have to the CIA to be shared with other agencies, so if you need a clearance for a job in the future, this incident will come back to bite you in the ass. Admissions are what polygraphers strive for, it is like their gold star and they do a little celebration dance jig when they get them.  The polygrapher with the most admissions on their file gets bragging rights in the office.  Did the CIA make you sign any admission forms at the end of your polygraphs?

Interesting!   The asshole polygrapher who interviewed me was all business and made no pretense about being nice whatever. >:(

wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 11:25pm:

KC1, sounds like you got screwed bad!   Sorry to hear about this.  The CIA recruiters are nice, but the security folks are evil rat bastards.   Their employees have to get polygraphed every 5 years, so I wonder what happens when a current employee "fails" their polygraph during their clearance review?  I wonder what happens when polygraphers polygraph other polygraphers?  Do they use the same ruse, knowing that they both know the "lie behind the lie detector"?  George is right.  "Admission Inflation" is common not only with polygraphers, but also your security clearance background investigators (BIs).  I had something similar happen when I told an investigator something  minor, which was not illegal at all, but the investigator either misinterpreted what I said or just decided to spin it into making it sound like I had no regard for the law (it was all in my FOIA file).  This wasn't the reason for my employment rejection at that time, but I'm sure it did not help me.   One thing I learned is that polygraphers and BIs are not your friends.  They try to instill a false sense of friendship in you, warm you up, so you are open to talk about things.  They will smile when they meet you, shake your hand, maybe even crack a few jokes.  I bet your CIA polygrapher asked you things like, "how was your weekend?", "did you have a nice flight?".  If you are a guy, they may even talk to you about sports and all the pretty women working at the agency and in DC.  They best thing to do when having your polygraph or BI interview is to give short sweet yes/no answers.  Do not give any extra info.  Do not elaborate on anything unless asked.  You need to be that boring candidate who doesn't talk much.   The more you talk, the more your words can get twisted around and harm you.  It is similar to police interrogations.  "Anything you say CAN and WILL be used against you".  Like I said previously, go ahead and FOIA your file and appeal, and then move on.  On the down side, expect that the info you have to the CIA to be shared with other agencies, so if you need a clearance for a job in the future, this incident will come back to bite you in the ass. Admissions are what polygraphers strive for, it is like their gold star and they do a little celebration dance jig when they get them.  The polygrapher with the most admissions on their file gets bragging rights in the office.  Did the CIA make you sign any admission forms at the end of your polygraphs? Excellent point!  The polygraphers and BI'ors are most certainly NOT your friends! Interestingly, I was never approached by any BI'ors.  I guess they were able to dig up all the dirt they needed from speaking with others. >:(

George W. Maschke wrote on Oct 24^th, 2013 at 3:35pm:

KC1, This sounds like an egregious instance of "admission inflation," where a polygraph operator spins a minor admission into something disqualifying. Polygraphers have an incentive to do this because they are typically evaluated based on their post-test confession rates. Falsely branding you as a member of Anonymous allowed your polygrapher to inflate his or her stats. The claim that the CIA polygraph division prevented a member of Anonymous from infiltrating the Agency may also be used to justify future funding requests.

If only it were true! ;D

KC1 wrote on Oct 16^th, 2013 at 11:30pm:

I been lurking on these forums for a while now and I feel comfortable to post something. Like most of you, I been a victim of the polygraph. According to my first polygraph test, it showed signs of deception when asked if I have committed a crime. I was quite shocked and nervous. To make a long story short. I got a mail saying they are canceling the "Conditional Offer" and disapproval to be allowed access to classified information. And their reason for this decision was written all out of context from what I told them. So I have 3 options: 1) "Request a copy of your investigative file" 2) "Request a review of the decision" which I write stating further details I can provide to overturned their decision. 3) Wait 1 year and re-apply or "you may file an appeal" after the 1 year passed. I don't know what to do, any successful stories of making their decision overturned or is this some kind of false hope? Should I go straight to option 2 and skip option 3? Because I know what I told them but I don't know what they have in file, and base on what they wrote to me is all out of context and I want to correct that. Or I just let this go and forget about ever applying anywhere else that requires security clearance because I'm screwed either ways?  Yes, you should definitely demand your records under the Privacy act.  You may be able to then determine exactly who or what f*cked up your application. Even if a recruiter may say otherwise, you can keep applying to the f*cking Agency until you turn 120, but it's almost certain that an unfavorable employment decision once made will never be reversed by the scum at Langley. :-/

:(

wrote on Oct 17^th, 2013 at 1:52am:

Sorry to hear your story.  Which agency did you apply to?  Was it CIA? I am a CIA reject.  I got the Conditional Offer of Employment (COE) and then "failed" my polygraph during my 3-day processing at the CIA Dulles Discovery Building (13900 Air & Space Museum Parkway, Chantilly, VA).  I got a certified letter a couple of months later saying I had been "denied access to classified information" and my COE rescinded.   I had a security clearance, have never been arrested, no criminal record, no drug issues, no foreign contacts, no security violations.  Yet, I'm some sort of security risk? I went ahead a filed a Freedom of Information Act / Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) request, which came through with a copy of my background file.   There wasn't much there since the CIA didn't run my background check yet for my clearance.  All I really got was a copy of my SF-86 security clearance form and a completely censored copy of my polygraph report (the report was essentially blank pages with my name and occupation on the header, the polygraph info was redacted).  I requested a "review of the decision", hence an appeal, and it took 2 years before I heard anything.  My appeal was denied.  I was granted one final appeal which was also denied.  No surprise.  I have never heard of any applicant for the CIA successfully appealing their negative polygraph result.  It screwed my cleared career for a while but I eventually got hired by another agency and got my TS/SCI clearance, no polygraph needed in this case.  The polygraph is garbage and they accuse EVERYBODY of something, usually crime or drugs or foreign contacts, to see if you'll confess to something they never would have found out about in the first place.  They have to reject a certain number of applicants to prove that the polygraph "works", which is doesn't.  You just drew a bad straw.  As did I.  Sucks for both of us.  I compare polygraphers to psychics, mere hogwash. I would suggest you file a FOIA and appeal the decision, as I did, but don't expect anything.  Forget about it, and move on.  The appeal doesn't cost anything and at least you'll have on record that you did appeal and completely disagree with their decision.  That is the only advantage of appealing.  You can still have another good cleared career without these polygraph-agencies.  As for re-applying, I don't know.  I haven't found any stories online about people getting hired by the same agency that rejected them previously due to a failed poly, but I'm sure it does happen.

I'm curious: Did the CIA conduct a field BI on you?
If they didn't, that might be the reason why you were able to subsequently obtain a TS/SCI clearance at another agency. It's been my experience that security clearances (or denials) do not "transfer" across different agencies. :-/

The "nice" Agency recruiters told me on one occasion in 1982 that, given my (academic) background and interests, I likely would be receiving an offer of employment.  On that occasion contact was initiated by the Agency NOT ME!
In 1990, another recruiter assured me that he would be happy to "sponsor" me for Agency employment.  He assured me that my have previously been declined for the Agency intern program in 1979 would  not be an barrier to Agency employment.
What permanently f*cked up my prospects for Agency employment for life was the BI for the internship program in 1979.  I had the luck to have the investigators latch onto various undesirables and incompetents who were willing to spew the most vile garbage about myself.
Yes, if you've been once refused employment by the f*cking Agency, you've missed your boat entirely.  Don't bother wasting your time and efforts, like I did. >:(

I just want to give you guys an update. I asked for both, my investigation file and a review of the decision.

And this what happen. I got detectives who came to my house and took my computer.

/---------------\
At the time I thought maybe they need this to clear my name? So I let them because I thought they were B.I. sent by the CIA after they told me their here about a recent interview by my previous "employer". I got nothing to hide, so i let them in and basically review back what was said during the polygraph and my appeal letter. Then they took my computer. 

They have my computer for awhile now (weeks) and not returning it and I later found out these guys are not B.I. their local detectives and with different motives. Probably trying to cork me into some criminal act.

Now i'm wondering did the CIA broke my NDA? Because everything said during my polygraph was confidential. Without my computer I can't get any work done. Now it looks I have to go out and build a new one.

KC1 wrote on Jan 28^th, 2014 at 9:29pm:

I just want to give you guys an update. I asked for both, my investigation file and a review of the decision. And this what happen. I got detectives who came to my house and took my computer. /---------------\ At the time I thought maybe they need this to clear my name? So I let them because I thought they were B.I. sent by the CIA after they told me their here about a recent interview by my previous "employer". I got nothing to hide, so i let them in and basically review back what was said during the polygraph and my appeal letter. Then they took my computer.  They have my computer for awhile now (weeks) and not returning it and I later found out these guys are not B.I. their local detectives and with different motives. Probably trying to cork me into some criminal act. Now i'm wondering did the CIA broke my NDA? Because everything said during my polygraph was confidential. Without my computer I can't get any work done. Now it looks I have to go out and build a new one.

Holy crap!  Seriously?  Did these detectives show you their badges or anything?  Who did they work for?  That's crazy man.  Maybe they really thought you were a member of Anonymous.  Did you inquire about getting your computer back?  You should report this to the police or FBI or somebody. Did you really build your own computer?  I hope they don't do this to everybody that fails the stupid polygraph.  Keep us posted man.  Sounds like the CIA is up to their old tricks again. 

KC1, any update on your story?

KC1, are you still here?
Admin, any word on what happened to KC1?  This seems like a pretty serious story.  Is the CIA sending goons to rough people up and steal their computers, then slap them with a gag order so they can't post on antipolygraph.org anymore?

wrote on Sep 24^th, 2016 at 11:20pm:

KC1, are you still here? Admin, any word on what happened to KC1?  This seems like a pretty serious story.  Is the CIA sending goons to rough people up and steal their computers, then slap them with a gag order so they can't post on antipolygraph.org anymore?

I don't know why they would need to go to all those lengths, since it is fairly certain that the Langley lackeys are constantly monitoring AP. :)

wrote on Sep 24^th, 2016 at 11:20pm:

KC1, are you still here? Admin, any word on what happened to KC1?  This seems like a pretty serious story.  Is the CIA sending goons to rough people up and steal their computers, then slap them with a gag order so they can't post on antipolygraph.org anymore?

I do not know what KC1's status is. It sounds like after the CIA falsely accused him of having admitted to being a member of Anonymous, they sent a criminal referral to local law enforcement.

wrote on Jan 30^th, 2014 at 12:15am:

thought they were B.I. sent by the CIA

No, those doing the BI will NOT contact you, because they don't care at all about what you might have to say.

They are interested in finding adversarial sources that will enable the investigators to dig up as much dirt about you as they are able.  You will never learn about the results of the BI until you make an FOIA/PA request to Langley, and receive a heavily redacted copy of their investigative report.  :-[

George W. Maschke wrote on Oct 24^th, 2013 at 3:35pm:

KC1, This sounds like an egregious instance of "admission inflation," where a polygraph operator spins a minor admission into something disqualifying. Polygraphers have an incentive to do this because they are typically evaluated based on their post-test confession rates. Falsely branding you as a member of Anonymous allowed your polygrapher to inflate his or her stats. The claim that the CIA polygraph division prevented a member of Anonymous from infiltrating the Agency may also be used to justify future funding requests.

This is an old thread but I want to comment on what George said about "admission inflation". I experienced the same thing with the FBI back in 2010.  I passed the frivolous FBI poly and moved on to the BI, and ran into my investigator in my neighborhood. One thing I learned was never talk to law enforcement, and in the case of applying for a job, give them minimal information.  I was in the process of moving from FL to VA for another job, and told this to the female investigator who appeared amiable and affable. I mentioned I was getting my car paper work together because I only had a couple of weeks before my registration and tags expired so I was in a rush to get to VA so I didn't have to pay for these things in both FL and VA. I made to VA with 2 days to spare and registered my car in time, as I planned.

My FBI file, that I obtained through the FOIA/PA, states that I planned to recklessly speed from FL to VA with illegal expired registration, inspection stickers, and tags with complete disregard for the law. 

KC1, if you are still alive, both of our stories represent how an applicant's honesty can be contorted to concoct farce disqualifying statements.