Friday, February 12, 2021

Re-reading the Capitol Police Chief's January 6 after action report to Nancy Pelosi

 







Capitol defended against BLM marchers


Capitol police January 6


Former Capitol Chief of Police Steven Sund ten days ago reported to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi on the events of January 6.  It is a factual account which provides many of the elements of the narrative brilliantly briefed and presented by the House Impeachment Managers this week.  He recounts in dry prose that the 1200 member Capitol Police battled an "insurrection" for four and half hours before the first 150 members of the D.C. National Guard was sworn in to assist them.  

We saw that hand to hand combat in the videos dramatically presented by the House Managers before an astonished nation this week.
The Managers' presentation fully justified Sund's affirmation that he is " proud of the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police, the vast majority of whom fought valiantly and risked their lives to protect Members of Congress, their staff, and the Capitol building "

But what should we make of Sund's  statement that "Perfect hindsight does not change the fact that nothing in our collective experience or our intelligence – including intelligence provided by FBI, Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and D.C. Metropolitan Police (MPD) – indicated that a well-coordinated, armed assault on the Capitol might occur on January 6 "

Sund, who retired immediately after the debacle, renders what appears to be a candid account.  The core of it appears here:
  The Intelligence and Inter-Agency Coordination Division (IICD) Daily Intelligence Report assessed “the level of probability of acts of civil disobedience/arrests occurring based on current intelligence information,” as “Remote” to “Improbable” for all of the groups expected to demonstrate on Wednesday, January 6, 2021. In addition, the Daily Intelligence report indicated that “The Secretary of Homeland Security has not issued an elevated or imminent alert at this time….”  

​The Capitol police received intelligence from the "FBI, Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security, and D.C. Metropolitan Police.   Why the intelligence failure?  Sund recounts that the November 4 and December 12 mass pro-Trump rallie​s​ -  MAGA I, and MAGA II -  protests of thousands at the Supreme Court and adjacent Capitol grounds were "handled...successfully".  The 30 year veteran had "never seen anything like the violent insurrection we witnessed on January 6."

How to explain the somnolence of the entire security bureaucracy and their failure to see the threat of what President Trump had promised "will be wild"?  The miscalculation seems to me to be explained by two converging factors .  First, most white military and police personnel voted for Donald Trump and, seduced by his fawning ​flattery, did so again in November.  ​The President's cries of fraud may have been plausible or acceptable to them. 

  Second, incitement by Donald Trump in his last ditch effort to hold office.  Sund reports "the [IICD]assessment indicated that members of the Proud Boys, white supremacist groups, Antifa, and other extremist groups were expected to participate in the January 6th event and that they may be inclined to become violent."  "May be inclined" in retrospect is tragically wrong.  But should it not have been foreseen?  The November 4 and December 12 MAGA marches of tens of thousands had been managed without major incident.  Why should this have been different?  This was the last chance for Donald Trump.  He summoned them for the last possible chance to reverse the vote: stop the count of electoral votes.  He charged them to "go to the Capitol", to "fight like hell otherwise we won't even have a country", adding "And I will be with you", omitting that it would be in spirit only.  He would retreat behind the newly reinforced White House fences.

But how could the assessment of little risk have been reached when in April 2020 we saw heavily armed protestors crowd into the Michigan State Capitol legislative chamber while it was in session?
We watched with alarm in April as armed men – many with semi-automatic military-style weapons in the `open carry' state– unhindered entered the historic State Capitol in Lansing, Michigan.  Some riflemen actually entered the legislative chamber while it met.  When armed hundreds marched on Richmond, Virginia, once the capital of the Confederate States of America rebellion, Donald Trump tweeted LIBERATE Michigan and LIBERATE Virginia.  Seven months later in December six men were indicted in a plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

If we saw such behaviour in other countries we would see it as the crumbling of civic order.  But here, sanctioned by the President, it receded quickly from view. And notwithstanding the December indictments the entire Washington, D.C. based law enforcement establishment seems to have suppressed the memory.  
- GWC




No comments:

Post a Comment