“The Department’s preparations were based on the information it gathered from its law enforcement partners like the FBI and others within the intelligence community, none of which indicated that a mass insurrection of this scale would occur at the US Capitol on January 6th,” Pittman said in her testimony.
“Nor did the intelligence received from the FBI or any other law enforcement partners include any specific credible threat that thousands of American citizens would attack the U.S. Capitol,” she added. “Indeed, the United States Secret Service brought the Vice-President to the Capitol for the election certification that day because they were also unaware of any specific credible threat of that magnitude.”
Pittman said in her written testimony that the department’s Intelligence and Interagency Coordination Division had produced as many as four intelligence assessments leading up to the riot January 6, with the final assessment showing that members of militias, White supremacists and other extremist groups would participate in the rally and planned to be armed.
The final assessment, Pittman wrote, prompted Capitol Police to post Dignitary Protection Agents at the homes of some congressional leaders, deploy other agents of that unit to the Ellipse to protect members of Congress and post evacuation vehicles for congressional leadership on the day of the rally.
But Pittman says the intelligence failed to foresee the scale of the attack that would take place on January 6, with thousands of rioters overwhelming outnumbered Capitol Police officers and breaching the Capitol. The intelligence told them to prepare for a protest, Pittman plans to say — but never indicated a coordinated attack.
Pittman’s testimony offers some new details on the actions the department took based on intelligence that many now say was either incomplete or poorly analyzed.
As assistant chief of Protective and Intelligence Operations, Pittman oversaw the department’s security details for members of Congress, investigations, physical security of the building, intelligence and interagency cooperation.
Pittman wrote that the final assessment had pushed the agency to increase the size of member protective details from four agents to six, to expand the number of civil disturbance units, to bring those officers in hours earlier than normal and to deploy SWAT teams to act as counter-assault ground teams, including snipers.
Pittman said that once the Capitol had been breached, “the Department’s priority was evacuating Members.”
She acknowledged several shortcomings in the US Capitol Police response, including that a lockdown of the building was “not properly executed” and that officers were unsure when to use lethal force. She said US Capitol Police was addressing both issues with additional training and guidance.
On Thursday, Pittman will echo many of the observations and recollections of her former boss, ex-Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund.
In her testimony, she wrote that the department had known that “unlike previous post-election protests, the targets of demonstrator (sic) would not be other branches of government or counter-protestors, but rather Congress and the Joint Session Certification process.”
“Based on this assessment, the Department understood that this demonstration would be unlike the previous demonstrations held by protestors with similar ideologies in November and December 2020,” she wrote.
