Pentagon staff undergo lie-detector tests after leaks about ammunition shortages
Translated from Dutch and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- About 50 military and civilian employees on the Pentagonโs Joint Staff reportedly underwent lie-detector tests over suspected leaks.
- The inquiry focused on reports about shrinking US stocks of long-range missiles and Patriot interceptor missiles during the war in Iran.
- The Pentagon said it takes leaks of classified national-security information extremely seriously and is investigating them.
About 50 military and civilian employees at the Pentagon have reportedly undergone lie-detector tests as investigators examine suspected leaks about US ammunition shortages.
The employees serve on the Joint Staff, which supports the highest-ranking US military officers. Sources told The New York Times and CBS News that the tests included questions about whether staff had shared classified information with the media or leaked details about declining ammunition stocks.
The tests took place in August after media reports described shortages of long-range missiles and interceptor missiles used by the Patriot air-defense system. CBS News reported that President Donald Trump was furious about the leak. Only a limited number of people had access to the ammunition information, and officials were also concerned that one of them could be a foreign agent.
Sources said none of those tested failed the portion intended to determine whether they had leaked information to the media. The Pentagon said it takes leaks of classified national-security information โextremely seriouslyโ and is investigating them.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced in July that the Pentagon and the Justice Department had created a joint task force to identify and prosecute people suspected of leaking sensitive information to the press.
extremely seriously
Originally published by VRT NWS in Dutch. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.