Newly released Capitol Police timeline exonerates Trump, says Pentagon offered National Guard four days prior to Jan. 6

Share:

The following contains editorial content which is the opinion of the author, a retired Chief of Police and current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today. 

WASHINGTON, DC- Unless you’ve been sleeping under a rock, this past Thursday the so-called “House Select Committee on the January 6 riots” or whatever they’re calling it had the first of a series of “hearings,” broadcast live on every single major network along with the usual gaggle of left-wing cable news channels.

Despite being advertised as a “hearing,” it was in fact a scripted made-for-television infomercial for the Democratic Party.

Pelosi’s January 6 inquisition panel represented nothing of a typical House committee hearing, since there was no real minority party representation on the panel.

Oh, there was Liz Cheney (R- WY) and Adam Kinzinger (R-IL),  two textbook RINOs, however Pelosi rejected House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s picks for the committee, which included Reps. Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Jim Banks (R-IN).

Pelosi’s exclusion of the minority leader’s pick for committee posts is unprecedented, which makes the committee and any recommendations coming forth from it a sham.

Of course, the January 6 committee already had the “investigation’s” conclusion already decided and merely tailored their report to reach an already-decided conclusion—that former President Donald Trump was responsible for the January 6 Capitol siege.

The committee never looked into the innumerable security failures, including those of Pelosi herself, in the lead up to January 6.

Now, a newly released Capitol Police timeline of events leading up to the siege seems to validate Trump administration accounts of what led up to the riot.  

According to government memos, the Pentagon first raised the issue of sending National Guard troops to the U.S. Capitol four days prior to the riots, which led to a series of rejections by not only the Capitol Police but also Democrats, a decision that directly led to the events of January 6.

The newly released memos seem to vindicate Trump and various administration officials.

According to a timeline of the siege laid out by the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP), an official from the Defense Department reached out to Deputy Chief Sean Gallagher of the USCP on Jan. 2, 2021 seeking information as to whether National Guard troops were going to be requested, however Gallagher rejected the offer after consulting with then-USCP Chief Steven Sund.

According to the timeline:

“Carol Corbin (DOD) texts USCP Deputy Chief Sean Gallagher, Protective Service Bureau, to determine whether USCP is considering a request for National Guard soldiers for the January 6, 2021, event,” the only entry listed on Jan. 2, 2021.”

The next morning, the timeline states:

“Gallagher replies to DOD via text that a request for National Guard support not forthcoming at this time after consultation with COP Sund.”

The decision to reject National Guard troops came despite indications the USCP was beginning to change earlier assessments which showed violence at the Jan. 6 elector certification vote was not likely.

However they soon realized that the massive Trump rally scheduled to protest the results of the November 2020 election results brought with it the possibility of violence.

Police records had earlier suggested that the protest at the Capitol would likely resemble “previous Million MAGA March rallies in November and December.”

However by late in December, internal USCP emails showed that some groups expected to attend the rally were speaking on social media or other websites about such tactics as blocking tunnels leading to the Capitol.

Despite Gallagher’s rejection of National Guard troops only the day before, the USCP issued new security assessments to commanders and executives, along with the House and Senate sergeants at arms which painted a much darker picture of January 6.

“Due to the tense political environment following the 2020 election, the threat of disruptive actions or violence cannot be ruled out,” the new assessment read. [emphasis added] “Supporters of the current president see January 6, 2021, as the last opportunity to overturn the results of the presidential election. This sense of desperation and disappointment may lead to more of an incentive to become violent.”

Remember, this was 24 hours after the Deputy Chief of the Capitol Police turned down offers of National Guard troops.

The newly released assessment was followed up by Sund changing his mind about the National Guard, reaching out to Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to deploy the Guard as a preventive measure on Monday, Jan. 4, 2021. The timeline provides an accurate summary of the series of events surrounding Sund’s request, many of which have been disputed and also sometimes misrepresented in the mainstream media.

“COP Sund asks Senate Sergeant at Arms (SSAA) Michael Stenger and House Sergeant at Arms (HSAA) Paul Irving for authority to have National Guard to assist with security for the January 6, 2021, event based on briefing with law enforcement partner and revised intelligence Assessment,” the timeline read. “COP Sund’s request is denied. SSAA and HSAA tell COP Sund to contact General Walker at DC National Guard to discuss the guard’s ability to support a request if needed.”

https://fundourpolice.com/

Walker told Sund, according to the USCP timeline, that if he were able to change minds and receive approval from Capitol officials, his team would be able to deploy about 125 troops rather quickly.

While Sund’s requests were getting punted around the Capitol bureaucracy, the Pentagon was moving ahead on Jan. 4, 2021, to get Trump to sign official authorizations to deploy the National Guard ahead of Jan. 6, 2021, promising as many as 20,000 troops if Congress asked. That was confirmed by then-acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller and his chief of staff, Kash Patel.

In an interview with journalist John Solomon earlier this year, Patel said:

“We went to the Capitol Police and the Secret Service and law enforcement agencies and Mayor Bowser days before January 6, and asked them, ‘Do you want thousands of National Guardsmen and women for January 6?’” Patel said. “They all said no. Why did we do that? The law requires them to request it before we can deploy them. And the DOD IG found we did not delay, we actually prepared in a preemptive fashion, which is what we do at DOD.”

Patel doubled down on that statement in an interview with Solomon last week, noting the USCP timeline validated the account he gave to Congress:

“The Capitol Police timeline shows what we have been saying for the last year—that DOD support via the National Guard was refused by the House and Senate sergeant at arms, who reported to Pelosi,” Patel said. “Now we have it in their own writing, days before Jan. 6. And despite the FBI warning of potential for serious disturbance, no perimeter was established, no agents put on the street, and no fence put up.”

When word got out that Sund was requesting the National Guard, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser interjected herself, writing a letter to Miller and other Pentagon and Justice Department officials requesting National Guard troops not be deployed unless approved by the DC Metro Police Department. Bowser cited the incident in 2020 when troops were deployed at Lafayette Park across the street from the White House during one of the George Floyd riots.

Bowser claimed in her Jan. 5 letter that the 2020 incident “caused confusion” and could have escalated into “a national security threat with no way for MPD and federal law enforcement to decipher armed groups.”

“To be clear, the District of Columbia is not requesting other federal law enforcement personnel and discourages any additional deployment without immediate notification to and consultation with MPD, if such plans are underway,” she wrote.

She added that the Metro PD was “well trained and prepared to lead the way,” to handle anything that came the city’s way on Jan. 6.

Unfortunately, Bowser, Stenger, and Irving all got it wrong, and USCP and DC Metro police were overrun at the Capitol, with the National Guard being held in abeyance until well after the violence had gotten out of control, which resulted in a “mad scramble” to get the troops which had previously been offered.

Moreover, on the evening of Jan. 5, the FBI’s Norfolk field office sent a warning to high-ranking USCP officials that new intelligence suggested some attendees were planning to storm the Capitol and targets lawmakers for violence.

An online thread discussed specific calls for violence to include stating ‘Be ready to fight. Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in and blood from their BLM and Antifa slave soldiers being spilled,’” the FBI bulletin read, which included the exact words intercepted by intelligence: “’Get violent…stop calling this a march or rally or a protest. Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die.’”

Unbelievably, the USCP’s after-action report said the FBI’s intelligence warning was not forwarded to Sund or otherwise incorporated into the operational plan sent to USCP police commanders and officers preparing to police the Capitol on Jan. 6.

In yet another bizarre turn, the USCP merely hours before the Jan. 6 event and aware they had no backup coming from the National Guard asked the Capitol Architect to make last-minute changes, one which was to remove a bike rack that had been initially intended to be used as a perimeter barrier. The Architect did as told, but saw the request as ill-advised, according to internal emails.

“This seems illogical,” Architect Brett Blanton wrote to a colleague only 15 hours before the onset of violence. “It removes a zone of defense. If you find out a logical impetus for the change, let me know ASAP. I’ll make calls to the board if necessary.”

All of the above flies in the face of the narrative that’s been coming out of the sham January 6 inquisition committee as well as the mainstream media. In fact, the January 6 committee has shown zero interest in finding out why security at the US Capitol was as lax as it was on that date, given the fact that it was known tens of thousands of people would be descending on the Capitol. It is almost as if they wanted it to happen.

There are numerous questions about that date, and the committee has shown little interest in answering them. For example, a man named Ray Epps was actively involved in the lead-up to the riot, actually encouraging people to go to the Capitol and go inside. In fact, when Epps made that comment, the crowd started chanting, “Fed, Fed, Fed!”

Yet for some odd reason, Epps has yet to be arrested in connection with the riot. Yet others, some who were merely on the Capitol grounds—which the last we knew is a public place—were arrested and in some cases locked up pre-trial for seventeen months. Yet the January 6 committee has zero interest in Epps, zero interest in finding out why the sergeants at arms refused National Guard help, nor the contents of Nancy Pelosi’s cellphone. Wonder why?

Right thinking people can see this sham for exactly what it is…a means to ensure that Donald John Trump can never again run for president. It’s not about seeking the truth—it’s about fulfilling an agenda.

It is a disservice to the rule of law and it is a disservice to the American people, who want to know exactly what went wrong and who to blame. This sham committee will accomplish neither.


Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First
Share:
Submit a Correction
Related Posts