People familiar with the matter say his ascent to that position without passing a standard FBI background check was unprecedented. ProPublica spoke with four people familiar with the polygraph issues, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation and because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the details of FBI background checks.
Bongino was selected for the role at the FBI although he, like Patel, had no prior experience at the bureau. Bongino had previously served in the Secret Service and worked as a New York City police officer. But he later gained millions of fans and followers in conservative circles for television and podcast appearances, having taken over Rush Limbaugh’s spot on numerous radio stations. Over the years, Bongino used those platforms to push conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and professed his allegiance to President Donald Trump while railing against the agency he now helps lead.
He’s had a rocky tenure so far, marked by public fights with senior Cabinet officials and accusations that he leaked information to the press, which Bongino denied. In August, Trump appointed Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey as co-deputy director at the FBI, setting off speculation that the White House had lost faith in Bongino. But he remains in the job.
ProPublica could not determine whether Bongino sat for a polygraph exam or what its results were. Though the existence of a polygraph waiver is an indication he may not have passed the test, it is possible Bongino received a preemptive exemption, a former senior FBI official with knowledge of the vetting program told ProPublica.
When ProPublica sought comment from the FBI, the agency denied that Bongino or the other senior staff members failed polygraph tests. “It is false that the individuals you referenced failed polygraphs,” wrote spokesperson Ben Williamson.
He added: “The FBI follows all laws and procedures on personnel security measures, and any implication otherwise is false. Furthermore, while the FBI does not comment on confidential security information, particularly in matters of personnel, this article is riddled with falsehoods — it misrepresents polygraph protocol, inaccurately portrays FBI security measures, and makes multiple false claims about FBI employees who have done nothing wrong.”
ProPublica asked the FBI to specify what it considered to be false. The agency did not reply.
A polygraph exam is not technically pass or fail, but a person is not cleared for approval if the examiner finds deception or is unable to reach a conclusion about the veracity of the answers given. Officials said that a person may not have technically failed the exams; the results could be deemed inconclusive, which would not meet the FBI’s standards for hiring or security clearances.
The FBI spokesperson initially said the three officials are so-called Schedule C — a category reserved for political appointees. He said the status would mean they were “not required” to undergo polygraphs. But Daniel Meyer, a former executive director for the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community External Review Panel, told ProPublica that an FBI employee wouldn’t be excluded from taking a polygraph exam simply because they’re a Schedule C employee. Three other lawyers, who specialize in national security matters, said the same.
In fact, the FBI’s employment eligibility guidelines say all employees must obtain a “Top Secret” clearance in order to work at the agency following a background check. “The preliminary employment requirements include a polygraph examination,” the guidelines say.
“How Did They Survive?”
Former FBI officials said they could not recall a single instance in which a senior official like Bongino received a waiver and was then given a top secret clearance. One said they were only aware of one waiver being issued in a seven-year period under Director Christopher Wray, for an outside subject matter expert whose polygraph results were inconclusive.
Two other officials, Marshall Yates, the agency’s liaison with Congress, and Nicole Rucker, Patel’s personal assistant, did not clear their polygraph exam and were granted waivers by Patel that allowed them to get a high-level security clearance, said officials with knowledge of the issue. Neither of their roles is as high-profile as Bongino’s, nor does either one have prior FBI experience.
Polygraph examiners ask a standard list of questions about drug use, criminal history, foreign contacts and mishandling of classified information. After the exam, an analyst scrutinizes the results and decides whether or not they indicate deception or are inconclusive. Those whose answers are determined to be inconclusive are given another chance to take the test the following day.
“I don’t know of anybody in my time that were in those senior roles that failed polygraphs, and most of us had taken multiple polygraphs,” said Bob Anderson, a former FBI executive who ran the counterintelligence division and retired in 2016. “If somebody would fail those polygraphs in my time, most likely they would be removed out of the classified environment until that could get cleared.”
This year, an employee within the FBI’s Security Division filed a formal complaint alleging the waivers violated agency policy. The Security Division conducts employee polygraph exams and evaluates their results. Its mission is to protect the FBI from leaks of classified information and infiltration by foreign spies. The employee filed the complaint with the division director, Robert Turner, a 22-year veteran of the bureau who previously held roles in counterterrorism and counterespionage.
A complaint about the waivers was also shared with the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General, sources said.
According to her resume, Rucker, 40, has served as an assistant to Stephen Miller, the powerful architect of the administration’s immigration crackdown, since January 2020.
Rucker would have detailed insight into day-to-day FBI operations and those meeting within the director’s office. She also assists in planning Patel’s travel, a former FBI official familiar with her job responsibilities said.
The White House said Rucker is not sharing information on the FBI’s operations with Miller and referred further questions to the bureau and the Department of Justice.
Meanwhile Yates, 37, was previously the executive director of the Election Integrity Network, a group that worked to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Yates, as the top liaison between the bureau and Congress, has wide visibility into the workforce, including some access to internal files about past investigations.
Historically, the job was staffed by a nonpartisan career FBI or Department of Justice official with deep knowledge of the bureau. Among other tasks, the official organizes closed-door briefings with lawmakers to discuss active, undisclosed threats to the country.
While an FBI spokesperson discussed the polygraph issues with ProPublica, Patel, Bongino, Yates, Rucker and Turner did not respond to direct requests for comment.
Sen. Dick Durbin, the Democratic ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, raised the issue of senior FBI leadership not passing polygraphs — without identifying any individuals — when Patel testified before the committee in September.
“As I understand it from highly credible sources, key members of Director Patel’s senior executive team and others on the seventh floor had disqualifying alerts on their initial polygraph exams,” Durbin said. “How did they survive? They survived because of a personal waiver by either the director or the attorney general to remain employed by the bureau.”
When Durbin asked Patel if anyone on his senior executive team received “disqualifying alerts on their polygraphs,” Patel refused to answer. And when the senator followed up by asking if he or Attorney General Pam Bondi granted a waiver, Patel replied, “I have to get back to you.”
The FBI did not respond to the committee on questions concerning polygraphs, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Durbin, in a statement to ProPublica, said, “Reports of disqualifying alerts on polygraphs by senior FBI officials — which require personal waivers from the highest levels of leadership to remain employed — are deeply alarming.”
Heart Rate Check
The polygraph exam uses a device strapped to a subject’s body to measure physiological responses like heart rate, blood pressure and perspiration as the person answers yes-or-no questions. Though the device’s efficacy is debated, it is routinely used in America’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies to screen potential employees and conduct leak investigations. The FBI first began requiring the polygraph exam for all applicants in 1994, according to a 2006 report by the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General.
They are used as part of a broader background check conducted on all potential FBI employees to determine if the applicant triggers any national security or suitability concerns. Suitability refers to a candidate’s criminal history, drug use or other issues that would prevent them from becoming employees of a federal law enforcement agency.
FBI security measures are designed to protect sensitive intelligence sources and information, and the screening is intended to ensure that officials given access to this information have cleared a thorough vetting process.
Staff who work in the director’s office on the seventh floor of the J. Edgar Hoover Building in Washington must also obtain an additional clearance called SCI, or sensitive compartmented information.
SCI contains some of America’s most sensitive intelligence secrets, and employees with that clearance are “read-in” to various compartments or programs. Bongino, Yates and Rucker all obtained SCI clearances after being granted the waivers, people familiar with their clearance level said.
In addition to bringing on loyalists, the administration has launched a purge of career FBI staff since January. More than 50 bureau officials have been fired or pushed out, a ProPublica analysis found. They include executives with decades of counterterrorism and intelligence experience, as well as line agents assigned to work on politically sensitive criminal probes, including investigations into Jan. 6 rioters and Trump.
Patel has justified these firings under Article II of the Constitution, which outlines the president’s powers over government — a novel use of the statute that is being challenged in the courts. Publicly, the administration has suggested some fired agents were involved in misconduct while investigating Trump or his allies.
Former acting FBI Director Brian Driscoll sued Patel, Bondi and the bureau in September, saying he was subjected to political loyalty tests and illegally fired. The FBI declined to comment when the suit was filed and federal agencies have yet to respond in court.
The FBI has recently used the polygraph to ask senior employees if they have said anything negative about Patel or had spoken to the media, multiple former FBI employees said. The New York Times earlier reported the use of polygraphs to investigate negative comments about Patel.
Destined for Something Greater
A lawyer by training, Yates has been the point person in responding to inquiries from Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, a Republican who for months has been publishing internal FBI documents, which he contends show improper past investigations into Trump. According to a former senior FBI official, Yates called regional bureau field offices early this year to get lists of employees involved in cases against Trump; several of those agents were later fired by Patel.
Originally from Alabama, Yates previously worked as chief of staff for former Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., and was counsel to Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. A Democratic representative accused Brooks of inciting rioters on Jan. 6, which Brooks denied; the civil case was later dismissed. Brooks has described the FBI as “partisan hacks.” Massie wrote on social media this month, “Capitol Police turned CIA orchestrated the pipe bombs on January 6th, and the FBI has covered it up.”
Little is known about Nicole Rucker, who spells her name online as Nikole. Multiple sources have described Rucker as Patel’s personal assistant. She joined Patel on a recent foreign trip to London, where she sat in on a sensitive meeting with a Western intelligence ally, according to a knowledgeable source.
Rucker arrived at the FBI on Jan. 20 and began working in the director’s suite without a security clearance, according to a former FBI employee familiar with her work.
Due to her initial lack of clearance, Rucker was escorted from the FBI lobby to the secure director’s suite by Turner, who was then the deputy of the FBI’s Security Division. Rucker eventually obtained a security clearance and was no longer escorted, the person said.
Williamson, the FBI spokesperson, said “people are escorted in similar circumstances all the time.”
In May, Rucker’s husband posted a photo on LinkedIn with himself and Rucker alongside Patel, standing in front of the FBI logo.
On her resume, she also lists a job working as the executive assistant to the chief of public affairs at the National Museum of African American History and Culture from 2018 to 2019. After that, she was a congressional relations liaison at Ultra Electronics, a British defense contractor.
Rucker founded Cobblestone Concierge, which offers personal assistant services such as “home management, organization, errand service and so much more!” according to her LinkedIn profile. The company’s website says its services include “household management (including meeting the cable guy).”
ProPublica interviewed her ex-husband, Joseph Churchville, who said Rucker worked at a title insurance company while they were married but had always thought she was destined for something greater. “She’s tenacious. When she acquires something that she wants, she has the ability to make things happen,” Churchville said.
