Intelligence Did Not Support Troops For January Six

Intelligence Did Not Support Troops For January Six

Intelligence Did Not Support Troops For January Six

According to former House Sergeant at Arms of the House, Paul D. Irving, the intelligence that came in before the Capitol Hill breach on January 6, 2021 did not support the call for the National Guard. This shocking admission came during a hearing a Senate Homeland Security hearing today.

The Senate Homeland Security Committee called as witnesses: Irving, former Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael Stenger, former Capitol Hill Police Chief Steven Sund and acting D.C. Police Chief Robert Contee, III. Until Missouri Senator Roy Blunt, (R) started asking questions, Chairman Gary Peters (D-MI) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Chicken Salad) had focused on the fact that Donald Trump is a bad man who exhorted his supporters to come to D.C.. Senator Klobuchar had to bring up the fact that rioters at the Capitol breach had smeared feces on the walls:

This does not sound Trump supporters to me. Indeed, in his testimony Senator Ron Johnson (R,WI) noted the reports from the day indicate the Trump supporters seemed jovial, overweight, and tired. He noted that agent provocateurs were seen in the crowd.

The Democrats all called the breach an insurrection and focused on the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. They did not make note that a Black Lives Matter activist was arrested for his activities on that day.

Because of intelligence received before January 6, the Capitol Hill Chief Sund made the perimeter around the Capitol larger and asked for the D.C. Metropolitan Police to stand by. He asked House Sergeant at Arms Irving for National Guard and Irving denied it based on the “optics”. So, that means that the Capitol Hill Police were asked to guard a larger area without any back up. The made the perimeter larger, but did not harden it.

And, speaking of intelligence and optics, here is the former House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving explaining the intelligence and optics:

Irving says he didn’t mean optics the ways the media interprets “optics”, without really saying what he meant. And, he turned down the offer of National Guard troops without discussing it on a wider basis. The Architect of the Capitol, who would know about hardening the perimeter and where soft spots are, was not read in on the situation.

All four witnesses agreed that there was intelligence available. They don’t seem to be able to tell us why or when the situation became volatile, meaning that this hearing is probably premature. But it did go pear-shaped and the men cannot agree on when calls were made for National Guard help:

Sund, the former chief, was adamant that he spoke to Irving, the former sergeant-at-arms, at 1:09 p.m. that day to request National Guard troops, who were not deployed until 2:10 p.m. But Irving insisted that “from my recollection I did not receive a request for approval for National Guard until shortly after 2 p.m. when I was in Mr. Stenger’s office.” Stenger was the Senate sergeant-at-arms at the time.

The dispute appeared to perplex Sen. Roy Blunt (Mo.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Rules Committee, who noted that in during the Capitol riot, the difference between a request for National Guard coming in shortly after 1 p.m. or shortly after 2 p.m. “makes a big difference.”

“Whatever happened here doesn’t seem to be in agreement with the various time frames, Blunt said.

Thanks to the backside covering by the parties involved in protecting the Capitol and the dishonest and divisive politicians, this will come to nothing and help no one. Except, Orange Man still be Bad and Trump voters are anarchists. Don’t you dare bring up Antifa.

Welcome Instapundit Readers!

Featured Image: Toni S. Williams

Written by

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner