San Diego Union-Tribune

FBI OFFICE IN VA. WARNED OF ‘WAR’ AT U.S. CAPITOL

Internal report rebuts claims that there was no indication of violence

- BY DEVLIN BARRETT & MATT ZAPOTOSKY

A day before rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol, an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit internal warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and “war,” according to an internal document reviewed by The Washington Post.

It contradict­s a senior official’s declaratio­n the bureau had no intelligen­ce indicating anyone at last week’s pro-Trump protest planned to do harm.

A situationa­l informatio­n report approved for release the day before the U.S. Capitol riot painted a dire portrait of dangerous plans, including individual­s sharing a map of the complex’s tunnels, and possible rally points for would-be conspirato­rs to meet up in Kentucky, Pennsylvan­ia, Massachuse­tts and South Carolina and head in groups to Wash

ington.

“As of 5 January 2021, FBI Norfolk received informatio­n indicating calls for violence in response to ‘unlawful lockdowns’ to begin on 6 January 2021 in Washington. D.C.,” the document says. “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 Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled. Get violent. Stop calling this a march, or rally, or a protest. Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die. NOTHING else will achieve this goal.”

BLM is likely a reference to the Black Lives Matter movement for racial justice. Pantifa is a derogatory term for antifa, a far-left anti-fascist movement whose adherents sometimes engage in violent clashes with rightwing extremists.

Yet even with that informatio­n in hand, the report’s unidentifi­ed author expressed concern that the FBI might be encroachin­g on free speech rights.

The warning is the starkest evidence yet of the intelligen­ce failure that preceded the mayhem, which claimed the lives of five people, although one law enforcemen­t official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to avoid disciplina­ry action, said the failure was not one of intelligen­ce but of acting on the intelligen­ce.

At the FBI office in Norfolk, the report was written within 45 minutes of receiving the informatio­n, officials said, and shared with counterpar­ts in Washington.

The head of the FBI’s Washington field off ice, Steven D’Antuono, told reporters Friday that the agency did not have intelligen­ce suggesting the proTrump rally would be anything more than a lawful protest. During a news conference Tuesday, held after the Post’s publicatio­n of this report, he said that the alarming Jan. 5 intelligen­ce document was shared “with all our law enforcemen­t partners” through the joint terrorism task force, which includes the Capitol Police, the U.S. Park Police, Washing ton’s D.C. police, and an variety of other federal and local agencies.

He suggested there was not a great deal for law enforcemen­t to do with the informatio­n because the FBI at that time did not know the identity of the people who made the comments. “That was a thread on a message board that was not attributab­le to an individual person,” D’Antuono said Tuesday.

D’Antuono did not say what, if anything, the FBI or other agencies did differentl­y as a result of that informatio­n. Nor did he explain why he told reporters on Friday that there had been no such intelligen­ce.

Recently departed Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said in an interview Tuesday that he never received nor was he made aware of the FBI’s field bulletin, insisting he and others would have taken the warning seriously had it been shared.

“I did not have that informatio­n, nor was that informatio­n taken into considerat­ion in our security planning,” Sund said.

After the riot, agents and prosecutor­s feel a great sense of urgency to track down and arrest the most violent participan­ts in the mob, in part because there is already significan­t online discussion of new potential clashes Sunday and again on Jan. 20 when Biden will be inaugurate­d.

Michael Sherwin, the acting U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said there would be a strike force of prosecutor­s looking to file charges of seditious conspiracy where the evidence merited it.

The Jan. 5 FBI report notes that the informatio­n represents the view of the FBI’s Norfolk office, is not to be shared with outside law enforcemen­t circles, that it is not “finally evaluated intelligen­ce,” and that agencies that receive it “are requested not to take action based on this raw reporting without prior coordinati­on with the FBI.”

Multiple law enforcemen­t officials have said privately in recent days that the level of violence exhibited at the Capitol has led to difficult discussion­s within the FBI and other agencies about race, terrorism, and whether investigat­ors failed to register the degree of danger because the overwhelmi­ng majority of the participan­ts at the rally were White conservati­ves fiercely loyal to the President Donald Trump.

“Individual­s/Organizati­ons named in this [situationa­l informatio­n report] have been identified as participat­ing in activities that are protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constituti­on,” the document says. “Their inclusion here is not intended to associate the protected activity with criminalit­y or a threat to national security, or to infer that such protected activity itself violates federal law.

“However,” it continues, “based on known intelligen­ce and/or specific historical observatio­ns, it is possible the protected activity could invite a violent reaction towards the subject individual or others in retaliatio­n or with the goal of stopping the protected activity from occurring in the first instance. In the event no violent reaction occurs, FBI policy and federal law dictates that no further record to be made of the protected activity.”

The document notes that one online comment advised, “if Antifa or BLM get violent, leave them dead in the street,” while another said they need “people on standby to provide supplies, including water and medical, to the front lines. The individual also discussed the need to evacuate noncombata­nts and wounded to medical care.”

On Jan. 6, a large, angry crowd of people who had attended a nearby rally marched to the Capitol, smashing windows and breaking down doors to get inside. One woman in the mob was shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer; officials said three others in the crowd died from medical emergencie­s. Another Capitol police officer died after suffering injuries.

The FBI said in a statement that its “standard practice is to not comment on specific intelligen­ce products,” but added that FBI field offices “routinely share informatio­n with their local law enforcemen­t partners to assist in protecting the communitie­s they serve.”

For weeks leading up to the event, FBI officials discounted any suggestion that the protest of pro-Trump supporters upset about the scheduled certificat­ion of Joe Biden’s election could be a security threat on a scale with racial justice protests last summer in the wake of George Floyd’s death in Minneapoli­s police custody.

While the nation’s capital is one of the most heavily guarded cities on the planet, local and federal law enforcemen­t agencies sought to take a low-key approach to last week’s event, publicly and privately expressing concerns that they did not want to repeat the clashes between protesters and police last year.

Some law enforcemen­t officials took the view that pro-Trump protesters are generally known for rhetoric but not much violence, and therefore the event did not pose a particular­ly grave risk, according to people familiar with the security discussion­s leading up to Jan. 6.

The FBI recently issued a different memo saying that “armed protests” were being planned “at all 50 state capitols” and in D.C. in the days leading up to the inaugurati­on, according to an official familiar with the matter, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive law enforcemen­t matter.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States