The American intelligence services had underestimated the risks weighing on the Capitol on January 6, so that the security apparatus was not adapted to counter “criminals ready for war”, admitted Tuesday of senior officials at the time of. ‘a hearing in the Senate.
After the acquittal of Donald Trump, accused of having incited his supporters to attack the seat of American democracy, Congress opened a new phase of investigation to understand how the unthinkable could have happened, in order to avoid that this “dark day” will never happen again.
Accused of having incited its supporters to attack the seat of American democracy, Congress has opened a new phase of investigation to understand how the unthinkable could have happened, in order to prevent this “dark day” from happening again. .
On the first day of their efforts, the elected officials of two senatorial committees heard from senior security officials in the Capitol, some of whom had resigned and had never spoken publicly since this assault. Beyond disagreements on their respective roles, they all blamed the failings of the intelligence services and the slowness of the Pentagon to deploy reinforcements. “Without the information to prepare adequately, the Capitol police were insufficiently staffed to cope with an extremely violent crowd,” said its former chief Steven Sund.
“Based on the information we had, I mistakenly thought we were ready,” said ex-House sergeant-at-arms Paul Irving. “We now know that we had a bad plan,” he added, saying he was “deeply shaken” by this murderous coup.
MM. Sund and Irving recalled that a January 3 report deemed “low or unlikely” the risk of “acts of civil disobedience” on the sidelines of the demonstration by supporters of Donald Trump, when Congress certified the victory of Democrat Joe Biden in the presidential election.
An FBI document was not transmitted correctly
The federal intelligence services had pointed out “a risk of violence” of which “Congress would be the target”, but had “never mentioned a coordinated assault”, underlined Paul Irving. However, the rioters “arrived equipped for a violent insurrection”, according to Mr. Sund: “they had weapons, chemical munitions, explosives. These criminals were ready for war. Five people died in the assault, including a police officer beaten with a fire extinguisher.
The day before the attack, a report from a local FBI office had alerted to more specific calls to “fight,” but the document, transmitted that evening to the Capitol Police, had not circulated in internal, revealed Sund.
“Just pressing send is not enough for a report of this nature,” said Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, deeming this lack of communication “very disturbing”. Witnesses also implicated the Pentagon, which waited several hours to deploy the National Guard.
Faced with the violence of the intruders, Steven Sund explained that he called for reinforcements very early on. According to him, a high-ranking officer, Walter Piatt, would have replied: “I do not like the image of the National Guard lined up in front of the Capitol. “
READ ALSO> Capture of the Capitol: what if the assault was not spontaneous but had been prepared in advance?
Witness to the exchange, Washington City Police Chief Robert Contee said he was “stunned” by the response. “It looked like we had to tick boxes when officers were fighting for their lives,” he said. “It is clear that the National Guard was not quick to respond,” said Mr. Irving.
A dissonant note, Mr. Sund accused the House Sergeant-at-Arms of having himself expressed, before the attack, his skepticism about the mobilization of soldiers. “He was worried about the projected image,” he said. “That’s wrong,” Mr. Irving retorted. “Image issues did not determine our choices. “
Phone calls that get lost
Mr. Sund also said he contacted Mr. Irving at 1:09 p.m. on the day of the assault to get the green light for a request for reinforcement. The latter said he did not remember it and had no record of this call on his phone. Senators have asked them to hand in the reports of their calls and messages.
The elected officials of the two parties, who will resume their work next week, have shown their willingness to work in a “constructive” way, putting aside the differences displayed during the trial of Donald Trump.
On February 13, 57 of 100 senators ruled that the former Republican president had been guilty of “inciting insurrection”, but it would have taken a majority of 67 elected for him to be convicted. Most of his party’s elected officials voted for acquittal.
Original article by : www.leparisien.fr