Police chief says US intel didn’t warn of scale of Capitol riot | Donald Trump Information
The acting chief of Capitol police will testify before a House committee while Congress continues to investigate the violence.
The United States Capitol Police were aware of the possibility of violence by armed extremists when the Capitol was attacked by supporters of former President Donald Trump. However, the secret services did not indicate the possible extent of the event, and the officers were overwhelmed by the incumbent “insurgent” police chief will testify in a House hearing.
Information gathered prior to the January 6 attack on the Capitol suggested that armed “militiamen, white supremacists and other extremist groups” would be attending the gathering, Yogananda Pittman said in a prepared testimony given to the House Appropriations Committee Thursday should be submitted.
Pittman was the deputy chief of police for the division’s security and intelligence operations and was in charge of the division of intelligence and interagency coordination (IICD) on the day of the uprising that took place after weeks of Trump’s allegation that the elections were “stolen” and “stolen” after the former president held a rally calling on his supporters to “fight” the results.
The IICD said in an assessment released Jan. 3 that Trump supporters viewed Jan. 6 as the last opportunity to discard the presidential election results and that their sense of desperation and disappointment “might be more of an incentive to turn violent become”.
“While the division was ready to neutralize and remove any individual or group who committed civil disobedience or violence among the demonstrators, it was quickly overwhelmed by thousands of insurgents (many armed) who immediately began attacking officers without provocation, circumventing physical barriers and refusing to obey any law, ”added Pittman.
“The department’s preparations were based on information it had gathered from its law enforcement partners such as the FBI and other members of the intelligence community. Neither of them indicated that a mass riot of this magnitude would take place in the US Capitol on January 6,” she said .
Pittman also says the department faced “internal challenges” when responding to the uprising. The officials did not properly cordon off the Capitol Complex, even after radio orders were given. She also says the officers did not understand when to use lethal force and that the less-than-lethal weapons the officers had were not as effective as they expected.
The attack on the Capitol delayed the confirmation of Biden’s victory for several hours as lawmakers were forced to flee from the angry mob that overwhelmed the security forces. Five people died in the violence.
To date, more than 200 people have been charged with their roles in the riot, including some with links to fringe right-wing groups such as the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys.
Pittman’s testimony comes as Congress continues to investigate the January 6 violence and security flaws that led to it.
Supporters of US President Donald Trump breached security and entered the Capitol as Congress debated the vote on the 2020 presidential election [File: Saul Loeb|/AFP]The investigation began after Trump’s acquittal on February 14th in a Senate trial after he was charged with “inciting insurrection” for his role.
Lawmakers have also announced they will set up an independent 9/11 style commission to investigate the uprising.
A warning from the FBI that a protest by Trump supporters could turn violent reached the U.S. Capitol Police the day before the attack, but top officials responsible for securing Congress that day failed to see it, they told lawmakers on Tuesday with.
Pittman’s predecessor Steven Sund said that while Capitol Police were preparing for “the possibility of violence” and armed protesters, they had not trained for “the possibility of a coordinated military attack involving thousands against the Capitol.”
Sund also testified that he had requested National Guard troops two days before January 6, but was informed by former House sergeant Paul Irving that he was “concerned about the” look “of the National Guard presence be”.
Irving denied on Tuesday that optics played a role in the decision not to use the National Guard forces preventively, saying instead that “intelligence did not justify it.”