Capitol Police: We never saw FBI warning about Jan. 6
Report issued the night before riot refers to ‘war’
Top Capitol law enforcement officials on Tuesday told a joint Senate investigating committee they did not see intelligence from the FBI the night before the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riot that warned of calls for violence online and said groups were “preparing for war.”
Under questioning from Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., the chair of one of the panels leading the hearing, former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said the report was received by the Capitol Police department’s intelligence division but was never shared with the agency’s command staff.
And Sund, who resigned from the Capitol Police in January, said he learned only within the last day that the report had been given to the Capitol Police before the attack.
“I actually just in the last 24 hours was informed by the department that they had received that report,” he told lawmakers.
The officials previously faulted intelligence failures at the federal level for not forecasting the escalation of violence at the riot. Former House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving,
the House’s top law enforcement officer, said the U.S. Capitol Police’s intelligence compiled from federal reports did not “forecast a coordinated assault” on the Capitol as happened during the riot.
Both Irving and his Senate counterpart, Michael Stenger, both of whom resigned in the aftermath of the riot, told Klobuchar they had not seen the FBI intelligence report.
“We all believed that the plan met the threat,” Irving said told senators. “We all know know we had the wrong plan.
“As sergeant at arms and as a senior official responsible for the security of the Capitol, I accept responsibility for my approval of that plan,” Irving said. “And as you know, I resigned from my position on Jan. 7.”
Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., the chair of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, hammered the former Capitol Police chief with questions about the failed distribution of the ominous Jan. 5 FBI warning. “That report had specific information,” Peters said.
“That raises a big question,” the chairman told Sund. “It does not get to operational command? How could that happen?”
Sund acknowledged the information “would have been beneficial to be aware of ” and indicated that the intelligence sharing failure was “under review.”
“I agree that is something we need to look at,” the former chief said.
On Jan. 12, during a Justice Department briefing, Assistant FBI Director Steven D’Antuono said the intelligence report, prepared by the bureau’s Norfolk, Virginia, office, included a “thread from a message board” that described an array of preparations for an assault, including a map of Capitol-area tunnels and staging areas in Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.
D’Antuono said that while the information could not be attributed to an actual suspect, the information was shared within “40 minutes” with law enforcement partners, including the Joint Terrorism Task Forces, which includes the U.S. Capitol Police, the law enforcement agency that led the failed response.
The contents of the warning, first disclosed by The Washington Post, included ominous language calling for attackers to “be ready to fight.”
“Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in ... Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die. NOTHING else will achieve this goal,” the Post reported, citing the document.
The intelligence breakdown was only one of several troubling revelations to emerge in the Senate hearing.
Sund also told senators that officers had not been trained for an actual breach of the building.
The former chief also said not all officers assigned to civil disturbance units had access to riot gear.
“I don’t know why you would have a civil disturbance unit that didn’t have riot gear,” Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio said.
In addition, conflicting accounts emerged over requests for National Guard assistance during the throes of the assault.
Sund testified that he requested National
Guard help at 1:09 p.m. Jan. 6, adding that the call was made to Irving. The request, however, was not approved until 2:10 p.m.
Irving said he had “no recollection of a conversation with Chief Sund at that time” and said it was probably closer to 1:30 p.m. Irving said he huddled with Stenger about the request before it was approved.
Lawmakers requested the officials’ phone records in an effort to establish a clearer timeline for the requests for the National Guard, though Irving told lawmakers his phone records would show he did not receive a call at 1:09 p.m. on the day of the attack.
Sund had previously said his requests to have the Guard in position in the days before the riot were denied, with Irving citing the “optics” of having troops at the Capitol. Irving denied the account, saying the decision had been based on intelligence available at the time.
The Senate hearing is the first of what lawmakers promised would be more to come in a public examination of the security preparations and response by law enforcement.
A record number of U.S. adults – 5.6% – identify as LGBTQ, an increase propelled by a younger generation staking out its presence in the world, a poll Wednesday shows. The survey by Gallup marks more than a 1 percentage point jump from the last poll in 2017, in which 4.5% of adults identified as LGBTQ.
The estimated 18 million adults who identify as LGBTQ represent an upward trajectory since Gallup started tracking identification in 2012, Gallup senior editor Jeff Jones said.
“It reflects what we are seeing in society and the way society is changing,” he said.
One of the biggest headlines in the 2020 poll is the emergence of Generation Z adults, those 18 to 23: 1 in 6, or 15.9%, identify as LGBTQ. In each older generation, LGBTQ identification is lower, including 2% or less of respondents born before 1965.
For the first time, Gallup queried respondents on their precise sexual orientation rather than a simple yes or no on whether someone identified as LGBTQ, which allowed more insight into identity, Jones said.
Among LGBTQ adults, a majority or 54.6% identify as bisexual, the poll shows. About a quarter, or 24.5%, identify as gay; 11.7% as lesbian; 11.3% as transgender.
Generation Z again leads the way: 72% who identify as LGBTQ say they are bisexual. There are gender differences as well:
Women are more likely than men to identify h as LGBTQ (6.4% vs 4.9%).
Women are more likely to identify as bisexual h than men (4.3% vs 1.8%).
Advocates are not surprised to see more young people identifying as LGBTQ. Ineke Mushovic, executive director of the Movement Advancement Project, cites “generational shifts in awareness and acceptance” that have reshaped how LGBTQ youths are embraced by families and peers.
“I have had conversations with many older LGBTQ people who break down in tears when they share their coming-out stories of decades ago – heart-wrenching stories of family rejection, losing parents, losing siblings, losing jobs,” she said. “Older generations grew up during those times when being LGBTQ could land you in jail, or alone or jobless.”
Parents have created environments where young people not only feel safe in coming out – but those on the cusp of adulthood can map futures packed with possibilities, something not seen even a generation ago, she said.
The survey comes amid a cautiously optimistic time for the LGBTQ community. President Joe Biden made equality a plank in his campaign. Biden has signed executive orders that prohibit workplace discrimination in the federal government based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and he lifted the transgender military ban. And he has pledged to sign the federal Equality Act, recently introduced in the House.