The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Former National Guard officer accuses Army generals of lying about the response to the assault on the Capitol

2021-12-07T02:28:49.419Z


Colonel Earl Matthews said the generals "repeatedly misrepresented, underestimated or misled" Congress and the Defense Department by saying the Guard did not have the training or resources to control civil unrest.


By Rebecca Shabad -

NBC News

A former Washington, DC, National Guard official has accused two Army generals of lying under oath in their testimony before Congress about the military response to the Jan.6 attacks on the Capitol.

Colonel Earl Matthews wrote in

a 36-page memo

to the House committee investigating the events that General Charles Flynn, who was Deputy Chief of the Operations Staff on January 6, and Lieutenant General Walter Piatt, Director of the Army General Staff, "

repeatedly misrepresented, underestimated or misled

" the House of Representatives Oversight Committee and the Defense Department inspector general.

Matthews, who on January 6 was the chief counsel for Major General William Walker, then commanding general of the Washington National Guard, alleged that Piatt misled Congress about the guard's "ability, readiness, and motivation" to respond in the afternoon of the riots.

Matthews also alleged that the generals "falsely said" that the National Guard did not have the training or resources to quickly switch from traffic control to civil disturbance control, adding that they were "

absolute and hopeless liars

" by characterization. of the events.

The National Guard secures the compound in Washington in February 2021.Tasos Katopodis / Getty Images

"Flynn falsely claimed that the Army General Staff (which is supposed to direct the global operations of the US Army) had to dedicate 30 to 40 officers and NCOs to bring 154 ill-prepared DC guards to the Capitol," wrote Matthews in his memo, "This claim was

a deliberate misleading of Congress. It's

not just an imprecision, it's a lie. Senior Army officers lied about little things."

The Matthews memo was first reported by the Politico portal.

Flynn and Piatt did not respond to requests for comment from the outlet.

Army spokesman Mike Brady told Noticias Telemundo's sister network NBC News that the "actions of January 6 were well documented and reported, and that General Flynn and General Piatt have been open, honest and thorough in his sworn testimony before Congress and Department of Defense investigators. "

As the inspector general concluded, the actions taken "were appropriate, supported by requirements, consistent with the roles and responsibilities of the Department of Defense in relation to the DSCA, and consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and other guidance," Brady said in the statement, referring to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, which coordinates activities between the armed services.

QAnon's shaman was sentenced to 41 months in prison for the assault on the Capitol

Nov. 17, 202100: 28

"

We stand by all testimonies

and facts provided to date, and strongly reject any accusations to the contrary. However, with the Commission's January 6 investigation still ongoing, it would be inappropriate to comment further," he added.

Matthews said in his memo that the remarks "contributed to deficiencies" in the Pentagon's inspector general's report.

For example, the inspector general's report says that Ryan McCarthy, then Secretary of the Army, was on a key call at 2:30 p.m. on Jan. 6 with Walker and other participants, including the chiefs of the Capitol and Capitol Police. Washington Metropolitan Police Department.

The report, according to Matthews, states that McCarthy spoke for about five minutes on the call when, in fact, he was not available because he had gone to meet with acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller.

Despite pleas from Steven Sund, Capitol Police Chief at the time,

Piatt said in the call that he would not advise McCarthy to deploy the

DC

National Guard

on Capitol Hill at the time, Matthews wrote.

[The Capitol Police had information about the armed robbery weeks before the event, according to the Senate]

Piatt said in the call that

"the presence of uniformed military personnel could inflame the situation

and that the police were best suited to handle the situation," Matthews wrote.

"Piatt and Flynn stated that the image of having uniformed military personnel deployed to the US Capitol would not be a good one," he continued.

Instead, Army senior officials recommended using Guard members to free DC police officers from traffic duties and allow more of them to assist in the response to the Capitol.

The generals

have denied saying that the Guard should not have been deployed to the Capitol.

Piatt wrote in response to a written question from House Oversight Committee Chair Carolyn Maloney, D-New York, in June: "At no time on January 6 did I tell anyone that the DC National Guard It was not to be deployed directly to the Capitol. "

[Six policemen will be punished with disciplinary measures for their conduct during the assault on the Capitol]

Flynn, brother of Michael Flynn, who was briefly Donald Trump's former National Security adviser, testified: "I never expressed a concern about the visual, image, or public perception of sending the Washington National Guard to the US Capitol." .

Megan Reed, a spokeswoman for the inspector general,

defended the office's report in a statement.

"We support the conclusions of our review of the report, the responsibilities and actions of the Department of Defense to prepare for and respond to the protest and its aftermath on the premises of the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021," said Reed.

Source: telemundo

All news articles on 2021-12-07

You may like

News/Politics 2024-04-13T22:11:35.093Z
News/Politics 2024-04-13T22:51:18.939Z

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-04-18T20:25:41.926Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.