GOP questions watchdog’s report on National Guard response to Jan. 6

GOP lawmakers say senior Army officials contradicted the Defense Department inspector general’s report that found no delay or obstruction in deploying the National Guard during the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot, according to newly released transcripts from the Pentagon’s internal investigation.

Republicans say they are suspicious about how the Defense Department’s IG office, then headed up by acting IG Sean O’Donnell, came to the conclusion in its November 2021 report that senior Pentagon officials’ deployment of the National Guard to the Capitol riot was timely and appropriate.

The IG said the office made its determination based on the overall response time from receipt of a request from U.S. Capitol Police to the arrival of the D.C. National Guard, which was between three hours, 15 minutes and three-and-a-half hours.

Additionally, the IG said its investigators did not identify a standard that required the Pentagon to fulfill a Defense Support of Civil Authorities “request for assistance” within a specified amount of time.

GOP investigators on the House Administration Committee’s oversight subcommittee, led by Chairman Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, believe the Defense Department watchdog’s conclusion is wrong, after delving into the March 2021 interviews from the IG transcripts.

“My investigation of the events of Jan. 6 and its aftermath revealed a disturbing truth: The DCNG was not at the Capitol to save lives or restore law and order in those vital hours because the approval and order to deploy were not relayed to the DCNG until after 5 p.m.,” Mr. Loudermilk wrote in an op-ed in The Washington Times. “Like most Americans, I believed that any official document issued by the Defense Department inspector general would be based on facts after a thorough investigation. What I found was the opposite. I will make these transcripts public so you can decide for yourself.”

Republican investigators compared the Pentagon IG’s interviews of senior D.C. National Guard officials to other interviews the same military officials gave about guard deployment to their oversight committee and the now defunct Democrat-controlled Jan. 6 Select Committee.

The IG concluded that the Pentagon was “reasonable in light of the circumstances” at the Capitol and that “DoD officials did not improperly delay or obstruct the DoD’s response to the U.S. Capitol Police’s Request for Assistance.”

But former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund told IG investigators that when he was making an “urgent request” for the National Guard as his officers were being “overrun” and “fighting for their lives” when the Capitol building was being taken over, the representative from the office of then-Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy told him that he did not “like the optics of National Guard standing in a line with the Capitol in the background.”

“I explained to them that the building is being breached. I need their assistance immediately. He [then-Gen. Walter Piatt — director of Army Staff, commanding general of the D.C. National Guard] said, ’My recommendation to the Secretary of the Army is to not support the request.’”

Mr. Piatt, responding to questions about why the National Guard was held back, told IG investigators, “What we were afraid of is that military assets would be employed without military command, and that weighed in heavily when forces were requested in support of January 6.”

Other senior National Guard officials questioned why Mr. Piatt rejected Mr. Sund’s request for the Guard to be deployed, including former Commanding Gen. William Walker, former Colonel Earl Matthews, former Command Sgt. Major Michael Brooks and former Brig. Gen. Aaron Dean.

“[Gen. Piatt said] at 2:42 pm ’It would not be his best military advice to send the National Guard to the U.S. Capitol at this time,’” Mr. Walker told IG investigators. “Military presence could make the situation worse and the optics were bad.”

Mr. Walker wondered if there was something else at play. “Why is there such a concern about proximity to the Capitol? We hadn’t had that before,” he said.

“We were seeing the Congress of the United States being overrun, and the Guard — and the Capitol Police, the MPD need help,” Mr. Matthews told the oversight committee. “We had people at the D.C. Armory who are able to help, and they’re not moving. And they’re not allowed to move.”

Officials told IG investigators they were concerned about the “optics” of sending out the D.C. National Guard close to the Capitol, claiming it would “influence even some of the demonstrators or protesters.”

Mr. McCarthy told the IG during their interviews he did not recall directly hearing any senior official use the term “optics,” and Mr. Piatt denied he ever used that word or the term “visual” as a reason to hold back the Guard personnel. 

“I don’t recall in this phone call ever using the word  ’optic’ and why I say that is because we saw the TV was already showing the images of the walls being scaled…the building is being breached,” Mr Piatt said. “To say that the optic of soldiers on the Capitol is not what we would want — to me is not a relevant assessment of the situation that was unfolding.”

Mr. Miller told the IG he “hated” using their word “’optics’ because it’s been used so prejudicially and negatively.”

“It wasn’t the optics. It was like there would have been huge political consequences,” he said. “I had to factor in the politics of this and that was my concern — is the situation does not warrant at this time U.S. military forces.”

In a statement to The Washington Times, a DOD IG spokeswoman said, “As with all of our oversight work, we based our report on our assessment of the evidence available to us. We have assessed subsequent information as it has been brought forward, and we stand by our findings and conclusions in the report.”

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, who chose all the Jan. 6 Committee members that investigated Mr. Trump’s role in the riot, blamed Mr. Trump’s White House when asked about the National Guard’s deployment delay to the Capitol. She claimed in June to Fox News, “Had there not been an inexplicable delay, the National Guard response could have saved lives with its response.”

“The request for National Guard response was absolutely made early enough to limit the damage done on that day. The problem is, the authorities responsible in the Pentagon — and ultimately, in the White House — dragged their feet,” she said.

However, Mr. Trump did ask for the National Guard days before the riot happened, according to senior Pentagon officials.

According to the IG interview transcripts, former senior Pentagon officials indicated that Mr. Trump was willing to approve guard or active-duty military that day.

Three days before the riot, then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley told military senior officials, “The president just says, ’Hey, look at this. There’s going to be a large amount of protesters here on the 6th, make sure that you have sufficient National Guard or Soldiers to make sure it’s a safe event.’”

He added, “POTUS says, ’Hey, I don’t care if you use Guard, or soldiers, active-duty soldiers, do whatever you have to do. Just make sure it’s safe.’”

Then-acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller told the Jan. 6 Committee that Mr. Trump “commented that they were going to need 10,000 troops the following day.”

He added that he interpreted that conversation “as a bit of presidential banter, or President Trump banter that you all are familiar with, and in no way, shape, or form did I interpret that as an order or direction.”

On Jan. 6, pro-Trump demonstrators made their way toward the Capitol to protest the congressional certification of President-elect Biden, and the military officials’ tone changed.

“[On January 6, 2021] everyone was like, ’Did you listen to the president’s speech?’ Mr. Miller said, referencing Mr. Trump’s rally at the Ellipse. “I’m like, ’The guy speaks for 90 minutes it’s like Castro or something.’ No, I’ve got work to do.”

Mr. Miller also told IG investigators he was “cognizant” about concerns that “Mr. Trump would invoke the Insurrection Act to politicize the military in an anti-democratic manner.”

He said just before the Electoral College certification, 10 former Secretaries of Defense had signed an op-ed piece published in The Washington Post “warning of the dangers of politicizing and using inappropriately the military.”

He said that “No such thing was going to occur on my watch” and that “There was absolutely no way” he “was putting U.S. military forces at the Capitol, period.”

He added, “The operational plan was this, let’s take the D.C. National Guard, keep them away from the Capitol.”

Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled Walter Piatt’s name.