WASHINGTON: Defense Department leaders placed unusual restrictions on the National Guard for the day of the Capitol riot and delayed sending help for hours despite an urgent plea from police for reinforcement, according to testimony Wednesday that added to the finger-pointing about the government response.
Maj. Gen. William Walker, commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard, told senators that the then-chief of the Capitol Police requested military support in a “voice cracking with emotion” in a 1:49 p.m. call as rioters began pushing toward the Capitol. Walker said he immediately relayed the request to the Army but did not learn until after 5 p.m. that the Defense Department had approved it. Guard troops who had been waiting on buses were then rushed to the Capitol, arriving in 18 minutes, Walker said.
The hourslong delay cost the National Guard precious minutes in the early hours of the Jan. 6 rioting, with Walker saying he could have gotten personnel into the building within 20 minutes of getting approval. As it stood, the support did not happen until the evening. The delay also stood in contrast to the swift authorization for National Guard support that Walker said was granted in response to the civil unrest that roiled Washington last June as an outgrowth of racial justice protests.
A senior Pentagon official who testified, Robert Salesses, said it took time for the Army to sort out what the National Guard was being asked to do and what its support might look like, especially since the Capitol Police days earlier had not asked for any help. Mindful of criticism that the response to the demonstrations last spring was heavy-handed, military officials were also concerned about the optics of a substantial National Guard presence at the Capitol, and that such visuals could inflame the rioters, Walker said.
“The Army senior leadership” expressed “that it would not be their best military advice to have uniformed Guardsmen on the Capitol,” Walker said.
The Senate hearing is the latest about the missed intelligence and botched efforts to quickly gather National Guard troops as a mob of then-President Donald Trump’s supporters laid siege to the Capitol. Taken together, the hearings have spelled out the challenge law enforcement officials face in sorting through an ocean of unverified tips but also highlighted how police inadequately prepared for the Trump loyalists; that FBI warnings about the threat of violence did not reach top police officials; and that requests for aid were not promptly answered.
“We in the FBI want to bat 1,000, and we want to not have this ever happen again,” said Jill Sanborn, the bureau’s top counterterrorism official and one of the witnesses. “So we’re asking ourselves exactly the questions that you’re asking: Is there a place we could have collected more (intelligence)? Is there something we could have done?”
Meanwhile, the Capitol Police disclosed the existence of intelligence of a “possible plot” by a militia group to breach the Capitol on Thursday. The revelation, coming as the acting police chief was testifying before a House subcommittee, differed from an earlier advisory from the House sergeant-at-arms that said police had no indication that any such violence was planned.
Much of the focus at Wednesday’s Senate hearing was on communications between the National Guard and the Defense Department. Walker described an “unusual” directive that required Pentagon approval before deploying a specialized 40-member “quick reaction force” and before relocating personnel from one traffic intersection to another.
As chaos escalated on Jan. 6, then-Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund asked him for National Guard help in a frantic call and then again on a call with Army officials, who said they did not “think that it looked good” to have a military presence.
“The response to the request took too long, so I think there needs to be a study done to make sure that never happens again,” Walker said. “It shouldn’t take three hours to get a yes or no answer.”
That account was consistent with the recollection of Robert Contee, the acting chief of police for the Metropolitan Police Department, who told lawmakers last week that he was “stunned” by the delayed response. Contee said Sund pleaded with Army officials to deploy National Guard troops as the rioting escalated.
Walker’s testimony, however, conflicts a bit with timelines that were put out and discussed by senior military and defense leaders in the weeks after the riot.
According to the Defense Department, Walker was called at 3 p.m. by Army officials, and was told to prepare Guard troops to deploy. That call was designed to give the Guard notice of the impending deployment so they would have time to move troops from their traffic posts to the armory where they would get new orders, protective equipment and weapons.
The Pentagon said acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller gave verbal authorization for the Guard troops to deploy at about 4:30 p.m., and that at 5:02 p.m., 154 members of the D.C. Guard left the armory, heading to the Capitol.
Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, said during a break in the hearing that senators “certainly will have questions” for Miller and for former Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy.
“Whether that’s going to require testimony or not, I don’t know, but it’s definitely going to require an opportunity to ask them questions about their view, from their perspective, of why this decision-making process went so horribly wrong,” Blunt said.
Salesses, the senior Pentagon official, stressed that military officials were concerned about responding forcefully to civil disturbance in light of what happened last spring, “where we had helicopters flying above US citizens, we had spy planes flying over folks who were protesting.”
The Capitol Police had not previously requested National Guard help, and in letters to Walker, District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser laid out the city’s request for help and made it clear there would be restrictions on the Guard members.
At last week’s hearing, officials in charge of Capitol security blamed one another as well as federal law enforcement for their own lack of preparation as hundreds of rioters descended on the building, easily breached the security perimeter and eventually broke into the Capitol. Five people died as a result of the rioting.
Thousands of National Guard troops are still patrolling the fenced-in Capitol, and multiple committees across Congress are investigating Jan. 6. The probes are largely focused on security missteps and the origins of the extremism that led hundreds of Trump supporters to break through the doors and windows of the Capitol, hunt for lawmakers and temporarily stop the counting of electoral votes.
Lawmakers have grilled law enforcement officials about missed intelligence ahead of the attack, including a report from an FBI field office in Virginia that warned of online posts foreshadowing a “war” in Washington. Sund has said he was unaware of the report at the time, even though the FBI had forwarded it to the department.
Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray said the report was disseminated through the FBI’s joint terrorism task force, discussed at a command post and posted on an Internet portal available to law enforcement agencies.
Though the information was raw and unverified, Wray said, it was specific and concerning enough that “the smartest thing to do, the most prudent thing to do, was just push it to the people who needed to get it.”
Pentagon hesitated on sending Guard to US Capitol riot, general tells Senate probe
https://arab.news/cx9ht
Pentagon hesitated on sending Guard to US Capitol riot, general tells Senate probe
- The hourslong delay cost the National Guard precious minutes in the early hours of the Jan. 6 rioting by Trump supporters
- Security boosted again amid warnings of a “possible plot” by a militia group to breach the Capitol on March 4
Switzerland mourns Crans-Montana fire tragedy
- All of Switzerland will mark a national day of mourning Friday for the dozens of mostly teenagers killed when fire ravaged a ski resort bar crammed with New Year revellers
CRANS MONTANA: All of Switzerland will mark a national day of mourning Friday for the dozens of mostly teenagers killed when fire ravaged a ski resort bar crammed with New Year revellers.
Just over a week after the tragedy at the Le Constellation bar in Crans-Montana, which left 40 dead and 116 injured, the wealthy Alpine nation will come to a standstill for a minute of silence at 2:00 p.m. (1300 GMT).
A chorus of church bells will then ring throughout the country.
The moment of silence will stand as a “testament to the shared grief felt by the entire nation with all the families and friends directly affected,” the Swiss government said in a statement.
At the same time, a memorial ceremony for the victims will be held in Martigny, a town about 50 kilometers (31 miles) down the valley from Crans-Montana, which had been rendered all but inaccessible by a large snowstorm.
Inhabitants of the plush ski resort town will meanwhile be able to watch the ceremony as it is livestreamed to large screens, including at the congress center that for days after the tragedy accommodated families seeking news of missing loved ones.
Among ‘worst tragedies’
A memorial that has sprung up in front of the bar, loaded with flowers, candles and messages of grief and support, was covered in an igloo-like tarp Thursday to protect it from the heavy snowfall.
Swiss President Guy Parmelin, who has declared the fire “one of the worst tragedies that our country has experienced,” will be joined for the ceremony by his French and Italian counterparts, whose countries lost nine and six nationals respectively in the fire.
Top officials from Belgium, Luxembourg, Serbia and the European Union were also due to participate in the ceremony.
Most of those impacted by the inferno at Le Constellation were Swiss, but a total of 19 nationalities were among the fatalities and the wounded.
Half of those killed in the blaze were under 18, including some as young as 14.
Of those injured, 83 remain in hospital, with the most severely burned airlifted to specialist centers across Switzerland and abroad.
Prosecutors believe the blaze started when champagne bottles with sparklers attached were raised too close to sound insulation foam on the ceiling in the bar’s basement section.
Experts have suggested that what appeared to be highly flammable foam may have caused a so-called flashover — a near-simultaneous ignition of everything in an enclosed space, trapping many of the young patrons.
Video footage which has emerged from the tragedy shows young people desperately trying to flee the scene, some breaking windows to try to force their way out.
On Tuesday, municipal authorities acknowledged that no fire safety inspections had been conducted at Le Constellation since 2019, prompting outrage.
‘Staggering’
The investigation underway will seek to shed light on the responsibilities of the authorities, but also of bar owners Jacques and Jessica Moretti.
The French couple, facing charges of manslaughter by negligence, bodily harm by negligence and arson by negligence, have been called in for questioning on Friday, sources close to the investigation told AFP.
The pair, who have not been detained, said in a statement Tuesday that they were “devastated and overwhelmed with grief,” and pledged their “full cooperation” with investigators.
They will need to answer numerous questions about why so many minors were in the bar, and whether fire safety standards were adhered to.
There has been much focus on the soundproofing foam, which, according to photos taken by the owners, had been added during renovations in 2015.
A video filmed by a member of the public, screened Monday by Swiss broadcaster RTS, showed that the danger was known years ago.
“Watch out for the foam!,” a bar employee said during 2019 New Year’s Eve celebrations, as champagne bottles with sparklers were brought out.
“This video is staggering,” Romain Jordan, a lawyer representing several affected families, told AFP, saying it showed “there was an awareness of this risk — and that possibly this risk was accepted.”
