[background noises] [inaudible conversations] the subcommittee on oversight will come to order. the subcommittee on oversight will come to order.

without objection the chair may declare a racist at any time. also that objection the meeting record will remain open for five legislative days so members may submit any materials they wish to be included therein. thank you ranking member tours, members of the subcommittee are courageous whistleblowers for joining us for today's oversight hearing. these whistleblowers are coming forward today to share for the first time under oath, the first-hand account related to national guard deployment on generous six. none of today's whistleblowers were interviewed under oath by the department of defense inspector general or the select committee. generate sixth, 2021 highlight a culmination of failures at many levels. for today's hearing we are examining the department of defense d.c. national guard's response to the violent breach of the capitol. so we will get into it. i like to play a brief video about the timeframe of the delay.

>> is this the video we received this morning? last night. [background noises]

alright, want to thank the maturity for indulgence of playing the video. it's important to set the stage of just how important three hours in 19 minutes can be. on a day like that. at a previous testimony for u.s. capitol police chief about the former speaker in the congressional leadership delay. the u.s. capitol police request for assistance for generate sixth, 2012 at 14:10 p.m. the d.c. national guard received the first request for immediate assistance from u.s. capitol police. at the protester started to gather and force their way into the capitol complex. however, at this time the capitol police had not officially approve the request roughly eight to 12:00 p.m. protesters breach the capitol began assaulting police officers. staffers and members of congress were ordered to evacuate

including myself and others that are here today. capitol police attempted to secure members and clear the capitol but were quickly outnumbered. there been many testimonies of that day but one thing is clear the u.s. capitol police requested and needed urgent assistance from anyone who would answer the call including the metropolitan police department and various federal law enforcement entities and the d.c. national guard. however there was a delay deploying the national guard for over three hours. almost an hour after the capitol is breached at 3:04 p.m. the acting secretary of defense christopher miller proved d.c. national guard to deploy to the capitol. just a brief history lesson for those who do not know executivee order 11485 delegates oversight of the d.c. national guard to the department of defense. 1969 memo further designates this authority specifically to the secretary of arms.

i generate six, 2021 commanding general of the d.c. national guard william walker reported directly to the secretary of the army, ryan mccarthy. the d.c. national guard was at the armory, one point to miles away from the capitol waiting for authorization to deploy to assist civil authorities and quell the riots. however the d.c. national guard did not arrive at the capitol until almost 6:00 p.m. that is three hours in 19 minutes of delay. during those hours chaos engulfed members of congress, law enforcement officers, reporters, staffers, and citizens. during those hours necessary help from the d.c. national guard was not on the way. our goal today is to get to the bottom as to why. it took too long for d.c. national guard to arrive at the capitol. the 113th awaiting capitol guardians have a proud history of protecting our nations capitol and serve our nation's leadership. nations leadership. nevertheless new jersey state police for delete one or 50 miles away it responded to

the capitol before the d.c. national guard. additionally the pentagon knew there was a threat to governmental operations caused by 3:30 7:00 p.m. the pentagon send its own security forces to guard the homes of defense leaders. at 3:30 7:00 p.m. note deceit national guard forces were on the way for the capitol. throughout my subcommittee's extensive investigation into the events of generate sixth and the select committee on january 6, we have uncovered concerning and inconsistencies regarding mobilization of the d.c. national guard. phone records, first-hand accounts, sworn testimony after action reports we have gathered there appears to have been a significant delay that the the departmentof defense and dee national guard or communicating the order of deployment. either way the purpose of this hearing is to hear the d.c. national guard's story for the first time ever about the three hour 19 minute delay. november 16, 2012 in department of defense inspector general released a report reviewing their role in the response to

generate sixth which claimed the d.c. national guardyed to the capitol as quickly as possible. however the report also credited significant delays in deployment to d.c. national guard commander general major general william walker neglecting to mobilize after receiving orders. specifically dod ig report concludes that the leader of the national guard response major general walker received direction from the secretary of the army, ryan mccarthy to deploy the d.c. national guard to the capitol twice once and for 35:00 p.m. again at 5:00 p.m. major general walker denies either of these calls took place. despite the many inconsistencies and contradictions of the department of defense responsibility that day the select committee on generate sixth ignore these discrepancies despite them being shared privately by their own staff and burled for the dod side of the story. following the release of the dod ig report multiple whistleblowers the d.c. national guard who were present with major general walker have come

forward to share their experiences. according to their testimony hours of vital response time or missed because senior army officials had personal concerns regarding military presence of the u.s. capitol. today we have the responsibility of recognizing these d.c. national guardsmen, listening to their testimony honoring their patriotism. these brave men showed up to defend the capitol and were discarded and ignored when they tried to come forward. i reach out to dod ig regarding concerns witt and contradictory narratives for nearly two months i have not received any answers. to date we will learn more about what happened that day regarding the delay. we'll hear side of the story that has been ignored for too long. most importantly today we will look into the future and make sure our capitol, our capitol guardians and our law enforcement partners are more prepared today than they were three years ago. we are only able to conduct this oversight because whistleblowers have come forward to share their stories. i encourage anyone to reach out to the subcommittee is our investigation gives our

recognize ranking member towards to provide an opening statement. >> thank you chairman and thank you to our witnesses for being here today for your service to our nation in particular the on generate sixth. you sacrifice your time to protect us. we owe you a debt of gratitude we are here today discussing the delayed national guard response of the capitol for one reason and one reason only. donald trump dispatched an armed mob to try to overturn the election he knew he lost. and for three hours in 19 and 19 minutes is that violent mob called his law enforcement for members of congress and the vice president who they were trying to hang the national guard was forced to wait and wait and

wait. all because of the chaos at the pentagon caused by the commander-in-chief and the fear he would involve the military and domestic political affairs, a big unknown don't we teach worldwide to emerging countries. this was a commander-in-chief who is the riot unfolded did not call as acting secretary of defense or secretary of the army to ask why the national guard was missing. where were they? a commander-in-chief who, after he learned someone was shot did not care. he did not call the national guard directly. a commander-in-chief who is eight and a family party and dance as the mob prepared to overturn the capitol. a commander-in-chief who sat in his and dining room watching it all unfold on tv like it was an

action movie with an ending favorable to him. how did we get here? let me tell you. in response to the june 2020 demonstration respond to the murder of george floyd president trump said he would quote diploid the dice it's in military" to put down the protest and even asked the secretary of defense on why the military couldn't quote just shoot the protesters in the leg or something." secretary esper and found the president street comment so disturbing he held a press conference saying he opposed invoking the insurrection act. then, in december as trump continued to spread conspiracy theories reported by members of this congress sitting here today about the election being stolen, the talk of invoking the insurrection act reached a

boiling point. it got so bad his own secretary of the army and the army chief of staff a four-star general issued a joint statement saying quote there is no role for the u.s. military in determining the outcome of an american election." and, as her top military leaders worried the president would declare martial law the rest of the national security apparatus was in total disarray. people were getting fired or resigning left and right everyone remembers that, right? with only 71 days and his german trump determining the secretary of defense and replaced him with an acting secretary of defense who was completely, completely over his head. contrary to attempts to rewrite history, the generate sixth

select committee conducted more than two dozen interviews and reviewed over 37000 pages of documents related to the national guard and dedicated 46 pages of its final report to this issue. the select committee found the chaos led to ill-equipped acting secretary of defense issuing an unclear order to the secretary of the army. in order so unclear it was interpreted differently by the acting secretary of defense the army chief of staff and the secretary of the army. three people, three different interpretations. it is sold there in the select committee's final report on the dozens of irrelevant transcripts available online. adding to the chaos, these top army officials exercise extreme caution and imposed on precedent restrictions on when and how to

deploy the guard on january 6. this was the direct result of the president's decision to involve the military and domestic affairs. two i witnesses, i am so sorry but i am so sorry that trump defense department army leadership failed you and they failed us on january 6. you should never have been forced to sit on your hands what while we were lying on our stomachs. planning to use a pen in our purses as a weapon to defend ourselves against a mob that was sent here to kill us by the president of the united states of america. we were preparing to die. i yield back in. what's a gentle lady yields. the chair not recognize the full committee ranking member for five minutes for the purpose of

making an opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you to our witnesses. for your careers of distinguished service. the deceit national guardsmen are no set capitol guardians. and we are only able to do art the days and months of filing generally six because you stood guard over us and as you did for that of her of your long service we oh, you and debt of gratitude. so thank you. i want to be clear, we are here today for a single reason. an un- patriotic cynical power-hungry man incited a deadly insurrection as part of his months long effort to overturn a free and fair american election. we are here because of his lies about the 2020 election. it is hard to believe it's frankly even hard to say but it does not make it any less true. it meant many cannot bring themselves to acknowledge it.

many in this room. as a result, we are here because of the majority 15 month mission to find malfeasance for the generate sixth select committee that investigated the insurrection were no malfeasance exists. and frankly, just as a question of jurisdiction should be raised. if this hearing is about the chain of command and/or communication between the various elements of the defense apparatus of the united states, it falls to the house armed services committee to do that investigation. they should be doing it. this is clearly not the venue for this to happen. i do want to address something at the outset. there is a notion that process that president trump ordered or pushed for 10,000 national guard troops ahead of january 6 has been debunked repeatedly it is also a red hearing and this is

why it. as the chair has stated 196 and executive order delegated authority at the d.c. national guard to secretary of defense who in turn delegated that authority secretary of the army. the president of the nine states ultimately sits atop the chain of command. would he do with the national guard before january 6 does not matter compared to his actions or i should say in actions on the sixth of january itself. what he never did on the sixth was called the secretary of defense, secretary of the army or d.c. national guard itself to find out they were not on the scene and order them to the capitol for that three hour 19 minute delay. so i went to quickly dispense with the claimant once and for all he ordered 10,000 troops. acting secretary of defense christopher miller was asked the g question provided the following answers under penalty of perjury. first question, the 10,000 troops did you take that as a request for you or to order for you to deploy 10,000 troops?

his answer and i quote no, absolutely not. i interpreted as a presidential banner or president trump banner that you are all familiar with and in no way, shape, form did i interpret that as an order or direction. he was also asked in february 2021 mark meadows said on fox news quote even in january that was given as many as 10,000 national guard troops were told to be on the ready by the secretary of defense but is there any accuracy to that statement? mr. matos answer, not from my perspective i was never given any direction or order of know of any plans of that nature so no obviously we have plans for activating more folks but that wasn't anything more than contingency planning. and a few questions later, to be crystal clear the question was, there is no direct order from president trump to put 10,000 troops to be on the ready for january 6 is that correct? his answer quote that is correct there is no direct order. there was no order from the president.

i think that is all you need to know under oath secretary of defense said it never happens. here's the bottom line. the president of the united states manipulate his followers into believing the election was stolen from him, summoned an armed mob to washington and then unleash them on the nicest capitol. and then did absolutely nothing to stop what unfolded. people died. we almost lost our democracy. we could have 100 hearings to deflect blame but the facts are not going to change. president truman famously had a sign on his desk that said the buck stops here. president trump sign on the other hand would read the buck stops anywhere but here. he lit the fire. he fanned the flames the defense department delayed the troops he want everyone else to take the blame. frankly i find it pathetic. i agree sedrick mitch mcconnell who said former president trump's action proceeding the riots were disgraceful, disgraceful dereliction of duty former speaker kevin mccarthy

said trump bears responsibility for his actions know if, and, or button i agree senator lindsey graham who said all i can say is count me out. enough is enough i only wish today and the rest of the republican party agreed with pae prior versions of themselves and with that mr. chairman i yield back. >> a gentleman yields. just for the record this hearing is not being done in isolation. it's been carefully coordinated with the house armed services committee not only has their blessing but a bipartisan blessing to hold this hearing. also without objection i like to submit for the record secretaryy miller's transcribed interview under oath to the select committee on january 6 two exurbs. mr. miller did you -- let me back up on generate certainty or priority of all the authorities needed in terms of activating

deploy the d.c. national guard? and he said yes, i felt i did. did you need additional authorities or was there discussion about your authorities in any way at the generate third meeting? no, i didn't talk at all the authorities i needed it did not need to discuss anything with the present regarding authorities. another question mr. mellinger tried to reach president trump that day? like i did not. ask why not? it's all the authorities i need to perform my duties and responsibilities that day did not need any other guidance from the president. i now recognize the gentleman from virginia mr. griffith for five minutes for an opening statement. >> let me start by surveying for the wreck of the army timeline of events from december 312022 generate seven, 2020 when the report dated generate seven, 2021. >> without objection. some of the comments this morning interesting.

because i too was on the floor that day. i find it interesting because there is an allegation the commander-in-chief will have to call everyone who's in the chain of command to make sure his orders are filed is my understanding i believe the evidence today will show from these gentlemen have given their time and our whistleblowers come comfort with other have not heard. they discover through their testimony that in fact the president had given the instruction perhaps misunderstood generate third period certainly by his officers to the d.c. national guard. i think it's important we keep that in mind for the period

we've heard a lot about the attempts to rewrite history. the generate sixth of the committee is allegedly supposed to have done all of this. we will hear i believe in these gentlemen today that they were not talked to by the generate sixth commission. and further, that commission will forever in his should be tainted it was the first time in history in an attempt to write the history after the fact that both the sides -- both major parties in this political situation that we have found ourselves and for the last 175 -- 200 years both were not invited to participate in an equal manner but the republican representatives who are supposed to be on that were originally set up are supposed be part of the generate sixth committee were not allowed to be present but there were not allowed to

cross-examine witnesses for they are not allowed to ask for it witnesses like these four brave gentlemen who are here with us today. there were not allowed to do call those witness in front of the generate sixth committee. all the generate sixth committee may found interesting information, they intentionally chose not to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth at the very best it could be described as a partial attempt to put forward a fax that favored their side of the narrative and not to get to all the facts per jack webb's famous character from dragnet use say the facts, we just want the facts, ma'am for that is what we are here to do today is make sure we're getting to the facts but not the political rhetoric. not the emotions per se but the facts from four brave gentlemen who served our nation who have come forward i don't know any of these gentlemen. i don't think any of them has a political ax to grind.

they are here just to deliver the facts i back. >> judgment is not objection all other members opening statements will be made part of a hearing record. they are submitted to the committee clerk by 5:00 p.m. today pursuant to paragraph d of committee rule six the witnesses will please stand and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm the testament you are about to give us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? >> we do request to let the record show witnesses have answered in the affirmative and you may be seated. i will now introduce each of our witnesses. a first witness command sgt major michael brooks command sgt major brooks military career spanned 29 years with combat tours in iraq. command master sgt brooks spent the end of his career in the d.c. national guard including the joint task force d.c.

mr. brooks now works at a company that seeks to protect a national economic security from undue foreign influence for generally six, 2020 what mr. brooks was advisor to major william walker advised on all illicit matters. our next witnesses colonel earl matthews decorated with long accomplished career in government and private sector but colonel matthew served deputy assistant to the president senior director for the defense of policy and strategy on the national security council stand. he also served army acting general counsel and principal deputy general counsel as well as the deputy legal counsel to the charm of the joint chiefs of staff. generate six, 2021 colonel mathis was a chief legal advisor to major general william walker and was with him all day. our next witness brigadier general aaron dean and cruel general dean served in operation desert storm in a combat tour in iraq.

he also served d.c. national guard for over 35 years. exemplifying what it means to be a capitol guardsman. on generate sixth, 2021 brigadier general jean served as major general walkers adjutant general and principal advisor. our final witness is captain active duty service member florida national guard. captain nick has explains law enforcement including as a current officer in the u.s. secret service. captain nick privilege to serve d.c. national guard public affairs department. on generate sixaptain nick major general william walker took detailed notes of actions of major general walker on that date. thank you gentlemen for your service to our country are strength and courage to come forward and share your accounting of events on generally six, 2021. we all look forward to your testimony. as a reminder we have read your written statements they will appear in full in the hearing record. committee rule nine you are to limit your oral presentation to

a brief summary of your written statement as i extend the time. in consultation with ranking member torres. please remember to turn on your microphone using the button in front of you so members can hear you. when you begin to speak the light on the timer in front of you will turn green. after four minutes the light will turn yellow. when the red light comes on your five minutes has expired we ask you please wrap up your comments at that moment. i now recognize command sgt major michael brooks for five minutes. >> good morning chairman loudermilk, ranking member torres members of the subcommittee. thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i'm command arm major brooks and former command senior enlisted. >> i'm sorry to interrupt as you pull the microphone a little closer to you? people in the audience are having a hard time hearing i apologize for that. you can start over will recite your time. >> thank you. is that better? >> that is better.

>> good morning chairman loudermilk, ranking never torres members of the subcommittee but thank you for the opportunity t. i'm command sgt brooks former enlisted leader of the district of columbia national guard capitol guardians. retarder march 1, 2020 through 29 years of active federal service in the army and the army national guard. well i'm no longer in service i continue defense of ardent great nation's compliance investigation specialist. with the compliance and adjudication division of the office of information and communication technology and services. have the bureau of industry and security. i served as a command senior listen later d.c. national guard 2017 to december 2022. that's most senior noncommissioned officer in the organiza directly to commanding general and from 2017 until his retirement and selection as a 38 sgt at arms

for the house of representatives my commanders major general william j walker. as senior enlisted advisor i reported only to him i was with him throughout the days before, the day of, and the subsequent weeks and months that followed the offense of generally six, 2021.so imagine g release the report without once interviewing myself or other critically significant d.c. national guard members with first-hand knowledge of what occurred that fateful day. not anonymous witnesses or anonymous officials, but senior ranking military members that were in the room, on the calls and secure video teleconference for i'm not here to disparage the army i loved and served for nearly three decades but to correct the record and speak for the hundreds of enlisted soldiers and airmen of the d.c. national guard who have always answer the call to serve without political bias or prejudice. we've always faithfully fulfilled their oath to support and defend the constitution of the united states against all

enemies foreign and domestic. those capitol guardians who continued to do so even today after being degraded by senior officials of the army and the army staff there in accurate biased report. i believe those steered the narrative of the report did so not for historical documentation or to enhance future military capability but to protect and advance individuals sought to shield themselves responsibility to overly enhance their role perceived significance and a critical moment in the history of our nation's democracy. and truth their actions no matter how innocent they believe them to be awful mark on our military show incredible lack of respect for the service of the men and women who serve the d.c. national guard before, during, after generally six, 2021. trust armies must senior leadership was lost their actions and comments have highlighted the army staff and secretary of the army's lack of knowledge and understanding of

the d.c. national guard, its authorities and capabilities. prior to the purchase from the murder of george floyd in may of 2020 i do not believe any of them understood just how unique the d.c. national guard is. the responsibility that is delegated from the president, to the secretary of defense, for that delegated to the secretary of the army. i believe it's this lack of understanding the military response of generally six. i'll not sit here today and safe we had been given authority to immediately respond the chief of the capitol police made that first frantic call for support at 1:49 p.m., that we would have prevented the breach of the capitol. what i can say with absolute certainty as we had a force equipped and ready to respond. and despite all the inaccuracy of the report we had a plan and would've liked the opportunity to try. instead we waited for hours, less than 2 miles east of the capitol building absolutely

frustrated knowing our capitol had been breached and not understanding why we had not received the authorization to respond. i cannot say the number of times someone is asked me where were you? where was the national guard or how can you call yourselves capitol guardians? there is no e response to those questions and the truth is we were there and we were ready. we just were not authorized to respond and that is difficult to explain. the soldiers and airmen of the d.c. national guard deserve better. they deserved to be recognized for the sacrifice of a prolonged period of civil unrest from may of 2020 until may of 2021. i look forward to your questions you may have, thank you. >> thank you sgt major britt are not recognized colonel earl matthews for five minutes. >> chairman loudermilk, ranking member torres, members of the

subcommittee. good morning and thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. my name is earl matthews i am a colonel in the united states army reserve. i'm the 25th year of my military service. i love our army. i am committed to our army values. i am here today because i am here today because two senior own general officers united states army general charles a flynn the tenant journal have acted contrary to those values. generals piatt and flynn have lied to congress, to federal investigators into the american people about why it took so long for the district of columbia national guard to deploy to the u.s. capitol generally six, 2021. their distortions contributed to the deeply and fundamentally

flawed department of defense inspector general investigation and to deficiencies and other official inquiries. on january 6, 2021 i was on duty and present during numerous conversations, videoconferences and phone calls leading up to, during and after the riot which was. >> order. >> which was engulfing the capitol for i say these general officers lied i do not do so lightly or cavalierly. i speak from personal knowledge to having interacted with them on generate sixth and my official military capacity. unfortunately, some senior officials within the department of the army and department of defense have sought to protect or promote gnn and piatt these senior civilian officials have excused, it

condoned or overlooked the misconduct of these officers. as a former acting council of the department of the army and its chief legal officer i take these matters seriously. even if others don't. i'm glad the subcommittee has an open mind and is committed to the dogged search for the truth. by formal statement which i provided to the committee in advance of today's hearing, i detailed general piatt and to during today's hearing i hope to discuss with you how they lied, where they lied and in my opinion why they lied. in thank you very much for. >> thank you colonel mathis or recognize a brigadier general aaron dean for five minutes. >> good morning mr. chairman, ranking member, members of the subcommittee. good morning brigadier general retired aaron dean.

let history record in this moment as i in my capacity as second in command of the district of columbia national guard entrusted with the sacred duty to advise and assist the commanding general on matters of operational significance concerning the deployment of the district of columbia national guard on generate six 2021. adjusted grape assertions inaccuracies contained in the inspector general's report dod ig 2022 -- 039. i believe it is my duty and moral obligation to stand before you today and illuminate the truth. i stand resolute bearing witness to the unwavering readiness and unparalleled dedication of the service members of the district of columbia national guard. i went to answer questio honestly as a witness to the lens of my 34 year career in the district of columbia national guard. i rubbed buff and the strongest terms the insidious insinuation the district of columbia

national guard faltered in its duty that languish in apathy or incompetence when called upon to safeguard the sentiment democracy. today i will tell the truth to the best of my recollection. unblemished by falsehoods and in doing so exonerate the honor of the brave soldiers and airmen who stood unwavering in the defense of our nation. may my testimony serve as a testament to the spirit of those who answer the call of duty on that historic day. thank you. >> thank you general d9 out recognize captain timothy nick for five minutes. >> mr. chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is timothy nick i'm a captain in the army national guard. i am here today to aid the subcommittee resolving factual errors in the official record of what happened on generate six, 2021 specifically regarding the alleged district of columbia national guard, delayed response caused by critical presidentially appointed senate

confirmed pentagon senior officials. i was concerned by the events that unfolded that day on the nine states capitol. as a federal officer of united states secret service former state trooper with the florida highway patrol my heart goes out to all law enforcement officers, sisters and brothers that held the line that day to restore public order to the chaos. i am here to my councils and dan meyer of the law from the firm has advised to be getting with my role as a confidential source of the select committee to investigate the generally six attack on the nights is capitol. my confidentiality was breached it was dan who interviewed to ensure it's protected as military whistleblower. first i went to explain my role on generate six. i was assigned aid to camp the personal assistant to major general william walker the commanding general of the d.c. national guard but is my only second day on the job. please focus on alleged facts

found in the november 16, 2021 department of defense inspector general's multidisciplinary review into the d.c. national guard response to department of defense role that day. i can say unequivocably the inspector general's review was riddled with inaccuracies, misstatements perhaps a false flag narratives regarding how critical pentagon senior officials responded with our public was under great stress. for instance, during a conference call at 2:30 1:00 p.m. with members of nine states army, u.s. capitol police, metropolitan police department, district of columbia government and usc secret uniform division u.s. army lieutenant journal walter piatt director of army staff and the armies lieutenant general charles fenton's chief of staff of operations were on the call. also colonel jon loomis executive officer to the secretary of the army. the army falsely denied general flynn was ever on the call. this is false on its face lieutenant flynn was on the call

and even participated in discussions. the defense inspectors a view rounds at language papering over the fact lieutenant colonel piatt are flynn on the call discussed they did not like the optics the direct quote. and, they said it would be the best military advice to recommend to the secretary of the item or, right mccarthy to deny the request from command and general william walker to deploy the d.c. national guard and eight u.s. capitol police in restoring restoration of order, liberty on capitol hill. in addition former section of the army right mccarthy claims is on 2:30 1:00 p.m. call and spoke on the call. this is false unless he was in the room shattering a call and did not speak identify himself. he was not on the call but he was in route to washington d.c. original office of the federal bureau of investigation and the concept of operation plan for generate six. he wanted on he called and spoke to major general walker at least

twice. or a deployment of the d.c. national guard but this is also false. at no time to general walk or take any calls nor did we ever hear from the secretary of any of the ongoing conference calls or secure video teleconferencing throughout the day. this i know because i was with the command general the entire time recording events. throughout the date major general walker told staff officers to stand by it with respect to the plane for the capitol hill. only at 5:09 p.m. the early evening i wrote down in my will book, was d.c. guard given orders to deploy it move to the capitol to assist capitol police. we arrived too late. one american lay dead with other sisters and brothers injured including federal and local law enforcement officers. we are ready and standing by, i know we were able to deploy immediately in general walker made the request to the national guard could have helped in civil disturbance restore public order quickly. the army national guard motto is always ready, always there the d.c. national guard was ready to help and assist capitol police.

we were not allowed to do our job due to paralyzed decision-making by acting secretary of defense chris miller secretary of the army brian mccarthy. this led to federal leadership in the pentagon to a crisis of federal leadership in the pentagon and delay the d.c. response by three hours in 19 minutes. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and articulate the facts as they happen. i look for to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you captain. and as we begin our question session i want to reemphasize how much we appreciate all of you coming forward but i know, as a veteran of the armed forces and myself this takes an incredible amount of courage to come forward and tell the truth. we will now move into the question session. >> just a reminder to make sure that microphones are very close to you during this time and out recognize a gentleman from virginia at mr. griffith for five minutes. >> of sgt major, a colonel,

brigade brigadier general, and a captain. your testimony is compelling, thank you. now to the question generally six, 2021 for each of you gentlemen with major general william walker from 1:49 p.m. through 5:55 p.m. yes or no? >> yes. >> i was. >> yes. >> yes. >> department of defense inspector general report dod ig report alleges secretary of army contacted major general walker multiple times on generate six during that timeframe. some allegations are to call some or three. but the allegations would be the assertions would be three oh 4:00 p.m., 4:30 5:00 p.m. and finall 5:00 p.m. do any of you recall any one of those calls taking place? what negatives are by way of background i was a political

appointee in the admin stretch i was i was also in the army reserve and national guard. now in june of 2070 as a point acting general department of the army the next month right mccarthy was appointed acting secretary of the army had been confirmed as under secretary of the army. ray mccarthy was my friend i told the committee is a good secretary in the army.

i mean, that did not happen. we know it's because that call was on conference. dc government conference bridge. now the dot directly state, mccarthy requested the call. i helped facilitate that call general walker on the call with dr. rodriguez. mayor and chief was on the call, all of us were at the call. mccarthy never spoke on the call. we were told he was unbelievable. i asked and were told he was unbelievable. he did so under oath and

lieutenant interviewed and we told him that. to me this is immaterial. under oath twice to the house oversight committee and the select committee that he even participated in the call. >> let me underline this, colonel, you are also an attorney. >> use. >> you've got your degree from harvard law school. >> i have no reason to be up here lying and i don't want to go federal prison. >> you understand if you lie to congress title 181001 makes that a crime, is that correct? >> unquestionably, sir. >> you also understand that as a member of the legal establishment that if you were to lie under oath your license to practice law no matter the fact that you have a jd from harvard could be in jeopardy, is that correct? >> i will point out, i was not under oath and it doesn't

matter. to lie to congress is still a federal crime and i submitted a document stating that these men were liers. no one said anything about it. he was a liar. >> you want the truth to come out? >> no question about it, sir. >> good, bad or ugly? >> exactly. >> is that correct, i heard yes, no, sir. >> we want the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> i have a lot of questions to ask and clearly with heartfelt emotions telling us that things weren't exactly truth and the january 6th weren't told the

truth, is that correct, colonel? >> they were not telling the truth but i think they knew that and they disregarded that. this is what i mean. so general flynn testified before the house oversight committee during opening statement he explicitly that he was not on the phone call, made no statements on the phone call. subsequently he was interviewed and he also stated he was directly asked by investigator council did you make any statements on that the call and he said he did not, he was not on the call he says. well, that's perjury. i'm aware. for the court to decide. for me that's perjury. for me to decide, i was interviewed by the select committee. >> unfortunately my time is up but hopefully you'll get another opportunity to talk about. i apologize. my time is up, i yield back, mr. chairman. >> the gentleman yields i recognize subcommittee

ms. torres for five minutes >> no, question. i was struck by your written

testimony that dc national guard was delayed because nelly mccarthy believed that the president of the united states might deploy the national guard improperly on that day and had taken measures to prevent this, this must have been incredibly frustrating for you and your colleagues in the guard. why do you think senior military leaders believe the president of the united states might employ the national guard improperly on january 6th, was it based on your records, actions or both? >> i think it was irrational. >> that at one point he was walking down the pentagon hallways and one of the most seasoned reporters asked him

whether the army was planning to seize ballot boxes. do you know if ideas like the president using ballot boxes was something that secretary mccarthy was considering when making decisions about deploying the national guard on january 6th. >> it was not a rational belief. >> no, it was not widespread. click of officers led by joint chief of staff who talked about a moment. >> well, let me tell you the new york times reporter on january 20, 22 that president trump actually directed his attorney rudy giuliani to ask the department of homeland security to legally take control of voting machines in key swing

states. i could ask for unanimous consent to enter trump have recalled and weighing into the record. >> without objection, so ordered. >> commander sergeant major brooks, you served in the army, army national guard for 29 years and spent the months january 6th. i understand that for the entire time that you were deployed you left in your office with the exception of maybe one week over the course of months. you clearly are a patriot who loves our country, how you feel watching the capitol get over turn knowing that you were walk but not permit today come assist law enforcement and defending it? >> it was very disheartening to -- to see. i believe it was something that any of us who serve in the

military was something that we would see in our lifetime. it was frustrate to go know that we had the capability and the personnel and unable to respond. >> was this atypical? >> i don't think -- it wasn't atypical. >> right now months away from the 2024 election and the man who incited the 2020 insurrection is on the ballot again, what corrective actions have the national bureau of department of defense taken to ensure the national guard can plan, coordinate and execute command, control in response to threats in the national capitol

region. >> we matched capability with request. if there's a request we match capability that we have and we had riot control capability on that day to provide services for the capital. >> so you would say over the last four years the smoke has been cleared and everyone has been cleared on how to respond and politics will not take priority over necessity? >> i can say the district of colombia national guard is always ready to respond. >> thank you, sir. >> and was ready for that date. and i yield back. >> recognize congressman esposito. >> we can two down the line. did you testify in front of the january 6th select committee? >> no, i received a phone call.

>> colonelled you were interviewed but never in front of the committee? >> no. >> captain? >> never in front of the committee. >> got it. so as the chairman mentioned in his opening remarks we are here to not only correct the record but we are better prepared today than we were, right, we want to be better prepared as a nation as an agency, we want to be better prepared for the next god-forbid incident than we were that day not really to focus on president biden, that's not what we are here today. captain nick in your opening testimony or the one commit today the committee you said that about 2:30 conference call and i quote, lieutenant general piat and lieutenant general

flynn while on the call discus how they did not like the optics. they stated it would be in their best military advice to recommend to the secretary of the army ryan mccarthy to deny the request from william walker to deploy the dc national guard and aid the united states capital police in the restore te restoration of ordered liberty. the subcommittee conducted in march 2024 you were asked if you recall hearing the word optics on your 2:30 p.m. phone call, you responded yes and i quote. numerous comments about optics of having the guard on the capitol and how much they would much prefer the guard relief mpd officers elsewhere in the city

so that they could respond to the capital, close, quote. for everyone and we will start with command sergeant major brooks, why would these military experts want to send the national guard to relieve mpd officers elsewhere after the capital was breached at 2:12 p.m.? >> in my opinion service senseless recommendation and logistics and amount of time to replace individual npd officers across the city would have taken too much time and further delay. >> i think the keyword there is senseless. colonel. >> well, the whole was mission for law enforcement, they never wanted the guard to be in the first place. they thought this was a law enforcement mission, they believed it would have required one hundred thousand demonstrators before the dc guard was necessary and that was the army's thinking. and i also said no involvement in the polarization of the -- no

involvement in the certification process. that was their attitude, we were not allowed to be east of ninth street which is where the capitol is. sounds like baseless decisions. specifically i know optics and his concern he did not want soldiers or airmen with the capitol on the background. they were giving every other reason why we should be around the capitol away from the capitol and not responding to the capitol and part of what i believe, i believe that they are unfamiliar with our true capabilities and what we are really design today do as the national guard. >> can you say that again for everyone to hear. >> they're unfamiliar with our true capabilities and what we are designed to do.

>> precisely, captain. >> i didn't hear the word optic also. i wasn't in the military to recommend to the secretary at the time to prove that request. >> i only have 30 seconds but i would like to go down the line once again to answer the question. was it clear at the time that the number one priority was to restore order or to protect the safety of members of congress, staff or visitors here at the capitol complex. it was clear that we needed to be at the capital at the time. >> make the police respond. >> colonel, absolutely not, congressman. it was not their priority, sir. >> thank you, i think it's clear. much, i yield back.

i want to start my question and i apologize i only have five minutes and i will cut through this quickly, first of all, appreciate very much your frustration, this is was your job to defend the capitol and for the reasons both of the hearing and a lot of conversation you weren't call onto do that. i can -- it's palpable about how you feel and i appreciate that and i don't think there's any disagreement here. you should have been here much sooner and i certainly don't know that anybody argues that it was your fault that that happened. i am a little shocked, mr. díaz sposito says we are not here to talk about president trump. to me it's like asking mrs. lincoln other than the incident, how did you like the play. the truth is the commander in chief would have ordered the national guard and frankly, i will have to go back and look at

the record that the president ordered the troops on january 6th. there's literally no evidence, there's no evidence anywhere that the president did that. in fact, look, i don't know -- i'm a civilian. probably the president of the united states as soon as the breach oh happened, as soon as there was any measure of violence at the capitol, i would have assembled people in the situation room and i don't care -- if the secretary of defense was there. the secretary of the army was there, i'm the commander in chief of the united states and so i would -- i guess i'd begin with general dean. if an order came from the white house from the president that deployed the national guard would that order have been questioned by anyone? >> i would answer it this way, i would say that that order was delegated. the responsibility of the response from the commanding general was in a written

document to give that basically gave him parameters on what he could do and not do. >> i appreciate that, i appreciate that. i don't believe the delegation of authority exempts the higher authority. a call came from the president or the white house that the president wants deployed, if the secretary of defense was somewhere and secretary somewhere else, would you have ignored the order? >> no. >> likewise, if the secretary of army had not acted but defense of defense, called general walker, deploy the national guard immediately, would anybody have questioned that order? >> no. we wouldn't -- i will speak from my perspective. we wouldn't have questioned -- we wouldn't have questioned it but we would have wanted it coordinated based on the document that was sent by the army. >> you would have sought a northern verify and make sure that was legally the appropriate

process but acted immediately, no? >> there would have been a conversation. >> there was a talk they needed a con op. >> yeah, not necessary a question, but what i hear is a lot of confusion the white house, the department of defense, secretary of the army and his office and the order didn't come down. >> yeah, go ahead. >> so secretary of defense, secretary of the army to general walker. the secretary of defense authorized the dc national guard to deploy at 3:00 o'clock. the dc guard was able to deploy

at 3:00 o'clock and to go in the street at 3:00 o'clock but the order didn't come from secretary of the army, so that was the -- >> i understand. >> the bottleneck. the president followed the chain of command. typically the president -- >> i would say this, excuse me, i'm going reclaim my time, i apologize, is that -- is that if i were the president of the united states and ordered it if that were true, let's say it had been ordered and 20 minutes goes by and nothing happening, i will be the phone with my secretaries, what's going on, i've ordered you out, move out, with all due respect, conversations should have happened, i don't know if it did or did not -- >> congressman, i think that -- the president would have called secretary of the army, the secretary of the army said we are moving as fast as we can. we need to know more information. that's what the secretary of army said in one testimony.

>> that's not what happened? he didn't say that in his testimony. he didn't say the president of the united states ordered him to -- >> it would not have made difference. secretary -- >> i disagree. >> i think you're right also. >> let me reclaim my time. in fact, my time is over. the point that i'm trying to make is that i don't disagree. this is an important conversation. i don't think it's one for our army, armed services committee ought to be holding this and come january 2025, we better be damn sure we have communication that is clear, compelling and chain of command but do i think this, there's no way to absolve responsibility of the president, the secretary of defense or the secretary of the army, you may dispute what happened, but something should have happened that triggered the deployment of the national guard so that you could have done your jobs and we

wouldn't have hearing this morning. >> i agree with him on last time, we need to be prepared for next time we have january 6th come up which is in the law. that being said i now recognize dr. murphy for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i apologize if i'm out of breath. it's just being old. thank you all for coming forward. every meeting has trump derangement syndrome talking to it. this was dereliction of duty by the secretary of the army who refused to come before the committee because he knew the

culpability and he lied and derelict on the duty. i appreciate you guys from the bottom of my heart to stand up for the united states and you took the oath as did the secretary and so i deeply appreciate it at your own personal cost because we know the weaponization of this government is occurring at exponential rate and it's just privy, it's just proof in the pudding that this is what we are dealing with. i swear, why do we not have the bottoming of this is beyond me. it's everything about trump. captain nick, you know, the summer before in 2020 when there was an absolute disaster in this country where riots and burning of federal buildings occurred, we saw billions of dollars, multiple deaths occurred, speaker pelosi, i believe, is a culpable part of this in allowing this paving the way for the terrible thing that happened on january 6th to dismiss

america's memory of what happened the summer before. in contrast, the protest in the capitol, there was no hesitation in creating a politicized community. we had a personal republican who saw it to go after president trump basically not allowing evidence to come before the committee. it's been more than 3 years that members to have dc national guard are coming forward with your oath to provide clarity. i will just ask captain nick in your testimony you mentioned you were a confidential source for the select committee. commission you go onto state my confidentiality was breach today the national media. would you mind expanding upon that? >> yes, sir, first, i would like to correct the record from a previous statement from your colleague when he asked question about pentagon officials and desire to send troops, i said absolutely, i meant they did not at the time want to send troops at the time for clarification.

i gave informal testimony and hired counsel. i was contacted from news outlet from writer requesting comment it had to have been leaked. >> it was obviously evident that anybody with objective eye that the committee was put forth for one more thing, if the committee had gone anything to a legal department, you would have cross-examination, other witnesses, et cetera, we never saw that to get to the actual

truth which is what all americans whether you're which party, period. i just want to reiterate something this is to colonel matthews and general dean. turning to the matter of security, secretary mccarthy says army was not prepared for deployment, do you agree with that statement? >> that statement is false and we were prepared in many ways. we even had backup plans. those members had control gear not vis to believe the public

but for their self-protection in case npd had to respond, control efforts if needed and so we had the capability, we had the planning and we had know-how, out of all nato summits, the summer of 2020, covid we were not able to respond to this, we are incapable, that's categorically false. >> my time is short but i just find it a slap in the face to all the good men and women who serve in the armed services to say that you're not prepared. a slap on the face. that's point blank what happened, thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back.

>> reviewed 37,000 pages of documented related to the national guard, on january 6th, their response and 46 of those pages are in the final report that was issued. if you searched the transcripts of those interviews how would these witnesses ahead of this hearing, you'll see the significant number of questions used for testimony from the select committee of their foundation because there wasn't a court reporter doesn't mean

that it didn't happen. as i told you in the back room i was in the balcony while all of this was unfolding. i was also witness to an assault to an officer where a door swung open on the balcony that i was sitting but because they didn't interview me for that incident doesn't mean that any of those investigations did not happen, but let me just remind everyone about what the president was putting out on social media during that time. at 2:24 p.m., the president tweeted out regarding vice president pence not having the courage to do the wrong thing at 313, the president had issued another statement saying i'm asking for everyone at the u.s.

capitol to remain peaceful. no violence. remember, we are the party of law and order. respect our law and our great men and women in blue. he didn't tell people to go home. he didn't tell them to go home. it took many of his own closest allies to get him to this point. thdidn't want the violence against the police or own vice president to stop, the truth is he wanted the violence to continue until he could take custody and continue to keep custody of his position. on 4/17 he posted video that contain maryland lies about the election but finally encourages people to go home. those are the real facts of what happened on that day.

so in addition to under democratic leadership and you want to continue to blame democrats for what happened on that day, the democrats did not tell the mob, angry mob to go to the capitol. democrats are not responsible for that. the request of this january 6th attack, we have gone back and forth as to who was ordered to do what, that information is very clear. there were no clear directions because if there were clear directions, everyone would have moved in unison, everybody would have been together putting together those plans that you said already exist. so colonel matthews, you seem to want to respond, please go

ahead. >> no, ma'am, so the committee interviewed again -- commander brooks myself, we all told them that the issues with credibility of several witnesses. people were not responding honestly and accurately as part of the investigation and information disregarded and that goes to the credibility they were telling the committee. first, the committee says -- the select committee stated that qrf there was a debatable what its purpose was. there was no debate about that. there was a civil disturbance response force. it was designed to respond to a riot. but general -- >> i think you're missing the point. there would have been no riot had the president of the united states not set up the stage and ordered people and told them that he would join them at the u.s. capitol. there have been no -- you're

missing the point of all -- of what happened six months prior to january 6th. the chaos that was happening within the branches of the military that are sworn to never get involved in domestic affairs, i yield back. >> the general lady yields. i apologize for the absence. a couple of points of clarification, the capitol breach began well before the people at the white house made it down to the capitol. the galas were erected at 6 lock in the morning and no one knew exactly what mike pence was going to do until 1:30 in the

afternoon. these were some of the questions of the narrative that came out from january 6th report which is this. this is how much is discussed about the dc national guard. the primary objective of the select committee was to investigate security failure at the u.s. capitol because we have to identify the failures before we can fix things. there was an entirem, the blue team who is commissioned to doing that. i challenge everyone to find anything of substance from the blue team whatsoever. so this is why it's important that we do the oversight is the job of congress and specifically the subcommittee to look into what happened. this is clearly within the security failure of the capitol. this should not be political.

this should not be bias in one way or the other regardless of who was coming to the capitol, regardless of who broke into the capitol. that should have never happened. there should have been no breach of this capitol, the resources are here and the idea that the new jersey national guard would get here before our own national guardsman whose job as colonel matthews said, riot control, traffic control. this is their job to come in and help defend the capitol. and so with that, i do have a few questions here. the report alleges that dod officials did not delay or obstruct response to the capitol. sergeant major brooks i will start with you. do you believe that the deployment to have dc national guard was delayed? >> yes. >> who do you believe delayed it? >> secretary mccarthy and senior officials in the army staff.

>> okay, why do you believe that they delayed it? >> i believe their misunderstanding of the capabilities of dc national guard and the seriousness to have situation to be honestly i have no idea why we never received that order, all i know is that they were more concerned with what it would look like with soldiers, with capitol in the background than protecting the capitol of the united states. >> colonel matthews same question for you. do you believe that deployment of the dc national guard was delayed? >> yes, i believe it was -- it was result of overcautious reluctant, hesitant facilitating leadership and i think they were concerned about the optics, military presence here and i don't think they trusted the commander in chief and that was because of -- our senior ranking military officer who was making

disparaging remarks about the president. they owe their position to him. there are books about how chairman mille was impeding ability of the president. so i think that that was -- that was an issue there, sir? >> so just to clarify, you think that there was a delay that -- that was calculated for one reason or the other but you're not indicating that there was nefarious purpose just so that we don't walk out with conspiracy theories that the dod wanted the capitol the fail, i just want to make sure t that's not -- that's not where you're going with that? >> i'm not going with that. i'm saying the conditions were set by the just talk of a moment and the idea that -- i mean, let me frank about it. black kids in dc guard serve election for trump is crazy but

that's what they were talking about. mean, it's crazy talk. and it was out there and it's in books. do you believe dod ig reports identify -- >> that dod ig report is with false information. even the select committee's report has shown that. can i give you a couple of examples, please? >> 6:35 general mccarthy calls walker. mccarthy, if you read his transcript from the select committee he said he never did that. he was getting ready for a news conference. he was taking notes and writing so preparing for a televised news conference and he overheardle general walker but general says he never told general walker. he never gave the go order.

they point in each other's directions. then they claim that they had to call walker again. 25 minutes later. that's absolute falsehood. mccarthy was in a televised press conference. dod instructor general has obligation to correct the record. we are talking about general officers in the army before the senate. they didn't like that and they wanted to get general piat promoted to general and they want today take down walker. general milley engages in that. he implies walker was lying or exaggerating and everything general milley says in transcribed interview says is incorrect and the committee had to know it. >> let me clarify something here. the general walker did testify under oath to the select committee, is that correct?

>> yes, he did. the implication of the dod ig report is that general walker falsely testified, is that fair? >> to the senate homeland security and governor affair committee. march of 2021. dod ig report came out in november 2021 and the implication was that he was not truthfully in his testimony. this is sitting officer of the congress of the united states appointed by speaker pelosi. a sworn career federal law enforcement executive and major general of the united states army. they were implying that he committed outright perjury on live television. i took offense in that. i wasn't working for general walker. i had nothing to gain from that but it was the right thing to do. this man was responsible for all your personal safety and smeared but -- >> okay. let me reclaim my time. there's other questions i need to get to but i just wanted to make sure they understand that

the implications that general walker falsified testimony or was not trueful would you believe that he would be selected to be the head security of house of representatives under pelosi, i just want to make sure we are talking about someone who is selected by -- by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to be the -- the sergeant at arms here, this is a bipartisan issue that we are talking about here. let me move on real quickly. captain nick the dod ig states they received copies from secretary mccarthy. did dod request a copy that day? they did not ask for your notes? >> i never spoke to anybody at

the department of defense ig's office and they never requested my notes or contacted me. >> interesting. ly do a couple more questions and we will continue down the aisle. they're advising him on what the national guard should and shouldn't do. you're in same service but you do different things. and so i think part of the issue is taking military advice from a senior active component officer of national guard issues pertaining to civil disturbance

or domestic response. i think it's out of their wheelhouse and i think sometimes they can provide inaccurate information. now you don't know who to believe. you don't know to believe the people that are supposed to advise you on military matters or the national guard. i would propose you need somebody to advise you arming an air force national guard matters not just military matters. >> thank you, sergeant major brooks, same question but let me proceed that with there were a lot of acts of violence, riots during 2020, we had that in georgia. as a response to the riots in atlanta, the governor of georgia called out the state patrol and the georgia national guard. nobody raised an issue with that because that is a job of the national guard to respond to the governor and provide for civil

disturbance and support in riot control. le is really the same question i did to general dean, is that not understood by certain dod officials that ultimately that is the same roll as the dc national guard is just the chain of demand is differently since dc is not a state? >> yes, sir, the dc national guard is unique in that aspect. in fact, their actual dc code that gives special authorities to dc national guard that no national guard in the country have to conduct business within the district and conduct law enforcement operations in support of federal or district agencies. i believe that general dean is absolutely accurate. i asked the question where was

the national chief, you were only asking active military who did not serve in the guard, did not understood authorities and at no time you reached out to the four-star general in charge of the national guard to get information although you had all of the information necessary, if you just understood the role that had been delegated to you many months or even years prior to, i think it is incredibly important going forward that the secretary of defense, the secretary of the army, the chief of staff of the army, thoroughly briefed on the authorities, capabilities and responsibility that has been delegated to them over the dc national guard and it's ability to respond to the nation's capitol. we thoroughly train on our ability to be reserve

>> thank you, i appreciate the thorough answers there. very important issue. i now r the full committee ranking member mr. morelle. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i will admit, i'm a simple guy and i do want to do some follow-ups and want to recognize that general walker was held in such high esteem by members on the other side of the aisle, so i think we have as much faith in him and had as much faith in him as all of you did during that time. the way i see this and maybe i'm wrong, i'm the president of the united states, the commander in chief, even though i've delegated authority, i think at some period at 3:00 o'clock when i see that there doesn't seem to be much movement i'm going pick up the phone and call the secretary of the defense and secretary army and say exactly

what is going on, issue orders are or there's confusion. i would have had chief of staff call general walker and say exactly what is happening. my only point is it would not have taken me, i'm not sophisticated, it wouldn't have taken me 3 and a half hours sitting in the white house watching this unfold confident in my view that while i've signed the necessary papers so i'm not sure what's happening but it's all good because i signed the papers, this is an attack on the united states capitol, democracy here in this country and around the world. so i just for all the other misdirection here and i'm not suggesting that we are trying to bring the president into this unnecessarily, it's that the president is necessarily part of the chain of command by the way so is the secretary of defense and so is the secretary of the army. they clearly had direct line responsibility to make sure this

happened and at some point when this is going on in the midst of the chaos, if only a few minutes go by and something is not happening, i'm picking up the damn phone and find out what is going on. but to this point, look, we have high respect for general walker. that's fine, they have that responsibility. so let me ask this and maybe i'm not sure if anyone can answer this but let me direct it first to sergeant major brooks. what -- tell me what the protocols should be going forward on what's suppose today happen, tell us in the future whether it's january 6th, 2025 or any other day that involves a breach of the capitol or issues here, what's the protocol, what should we know needs to be in place that people fear wasn't? how do we make sure this doesn't happen again? what's the protocol like?

>> one positive step that i believe has already been taken is i believe they've given the authority to thef the capitol police for approval. that's a huge step. secondly, i believe that dc national guard has been neglected for many years for what i believe to be the lack of knowledge or understanding it was put on a shelf, those who are delegated authority over the secretary of the army, the secretary of defense did not thoroughly understand their responsibility, you know, they're ultimately one of the commanders, one of the senior leaders of the dc national guard. over the 17 years that i served in the dc national guard repeatedly the national guard bureau came down and remove

units, without objection. the governor of your state was told they were to move guard units your governor would be upset and there would be a significant challenge to that correct, the secretary of the army is supposed to be our governor, is supposed to defend the dc national guard from losing its capability to support and defend capitol of the united states. that has been neglected for decades and it needs to change. the dc national guard should be the elite unit that it was designed to be under thomas jefferson. it is responsible for the seat of democracy. it is not responsible for a state, a terror, it's responsible for a city, it is the only guard responsible for a city, it just happens to be the capitol of the most powerful nation in the world and i think that's significant and if -- if that change does not come, if this happens again and unfortunately in our political environment i think there's a

chance. >> well, and i appreciate that response and i'm almost out of time. i would simply say this that i also think leading up to januare challenges from the president to the secretary of defense to the secretary of the army there should have been a lot of work in preparation for making sure lines of communications were set and series of protocol that is would be followed if and when things happened and that clearly didn't happen as well. gentleman, i appreciate not only your testimony for being here today but long service and support for the united states, thank you, and i yield back. >> the gentleman yields, i recognize the gentleman from virginia, mr. griffith for five minutes. >> i submit to you if the president of the united states had gone outside of chain of command and acalled general walker directly bypassing his acting secretary of defense and secretary of the army, we might

very well be in a hearing trying to find out why the president was interfering with the national guard, would you agree with that commander, major? >> that would have been highly irregular. >> sir, keep in mind, during that time they were talking about the president improperly using the military and they want today take precautions during that use. they wanted to have it both ways. so -- >> that's exactly what i was hearing and i just want today put it and make sure we had it on the record. i -- i put on the record previously in my previous line of questions that all of you were there with major general william walker with 1:45 p.m. through 5:55 p.m. during that time period we already established that he didn't receive any calls from secretary mccarthy but did he try to reach out to secretary mccarthy during that time frame. did y'all witness any attempts

by him to reach out? i'm just asking for facts? >> you want to -- >> captain. >> yes, sir. i witnessed general walker reaching out multiple times. >> multiple times? >> yes, sir. >> secretary mccarthy, he was in comunicado. n the pentagon, you're not going to be reachable by cell phone. if he's in with the chairman of defense there's a reason he wouldn't be reached. so i gave secretary mccarthy the benefit of the doubt there. >> and i appreciate that. we are just trying to get the facts. my understanding is that you would have been second in command behind major general walker, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> and if for some reason because we heard earlier as part

of dod ig report that -- that there were attempts to reach general walker which you all said didn't happen but let's assume for sake of argument that they couldn't reach him for some unknown reason, wouldn't the proper move then have been to call you in this case of an emergency where orders have been given to activate the national guard? >> that is correct. >> and it's interesting and i'm not a military man, bear with me, maybe i'm asking that you all know and i don't, and that is that the major general walker indicated that he had called to initiate movement, now i understand there wasn't a call but what does initiate movement mean? does that mean to get -- to go lend assistance, what exactly does that mean general dean? >> initiate movement means that you actually give the order for a force to move.

so in this case it would have been our or any force for disturbsance. >> that would have been the order to head to the capitol. that's why i asked. i wanted to know. and captain nick, i think this is in the record, what time did the dc national guard learn that they were authorized to deploy to the capitol? >> i wrote down to my notes 5:0. >> 5:09 p.m. they've asked if the president questions from the other side indicated that the president if there wasn't any action should have jumped chain of command called general walker but if -- if you are hyatt or flynn and you knew that there was supposed to be a deployment and initiate

the move, wouldn't you have reached out to somebody if you couldn't get of walker. wouldn't they have been able to -- to properly call general dean? i will let anybody answer. >> yes, sir, i think we miss a key point in all of this conversation when we are talking about who and what. when we go back to the significant fact that the only we are here today secretary mccarthy removed general's ability to execute his immediate response authority. secretary mccarthy changed the memo from secretary of defense to secretary of the army, the one that we got from secretary mccarthy stated major general walker could not deploy qrf without the secretary of army's order. emergency response.

>> correct. i just -- >> and when was that memo or order given to not do anything without the direct call from the secretary of the army? >> january 5th or -- i think the memo -- >> several days before january 6th. >> yes, sir. >> i appreciate your questions. i appreciate you all. thank you very much for your courage to be here today. i know it's got to put you in a lot of stress. i yield back. >> i recognize the gentleman from new york. >> thank you, mr. chairman. sergeant major brooks, at the time you were the most senior noncommissioned officer in the organization, can you share briefly what was happening at the dc army between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. on january 6th? >> immediately upon receiving the 149 call from chief, we the national guard initiated movement from the qrf from air force, andrews air force base to the army so they were there.

we were then taking the soldiers that were coming in for the second shift that were already at the armory, we had geared them fully kitted them with riot control gear and moved our transportation onto the armory drill force so not to arouse any, you know, any public awareness of what was going on and they were loaded and standing by ready to go. they had been divided into civil disturbance platoons roughly 40, to 45 people per platoon with appropriate leadership which coincidently matches the mpd civil disturbance as well because as we stated previously we train with them and we wanted to be as close to their force package as possible. >> right, you train with them to do the work that you're prepared to do which is exactly the opposite of what so-called leadership was telling you your mission was? >> yes, but i think they -- they'd like to say untrained and they point us conducting

training and some soldiers or airmen may have had their first experience of training. the army force get new -- brand-new privates and airmen every day. .. .. get ready to go on the 2:0 call. is that accurate?

>> there was no mention first of all he wasn't even on the call. he wasn't identified on the call, nor did he speak on the call. >> if i leave anything out please correct me. you were asking the general counsel to the army, you were principal deputy counsel. the deputy alleged counsel to the chairman of the joint chiefs. a special counsel to the director of national intelligence. you served the country faithfully in combat in both iraq and afghanistan. and you are a harvard law grad. pretty well accomplished. let me ask you a question. you have a minute and 40 seconds. you were in charge on

january 6th. >> [inaudible] authorization to go to the hill. authorization has been given and had all he needed to act. i think it was a bottleneck. >> again the goal today was to make sure that we were better prepared next time.

what i would have done if i was in the position or if i was the secretary i would have given more latitude. i wouldn't have written a memo so constraining that it would take one person to mobilize the national guard. >> i would have given him the authorization and said when you get there give me a call and we will discuss how it is going to be deployed. my time is expired i want to thank you for your service to this country. thank you and i yield back. i've got some closing questions and then we will adjourn after that. i want to do a quick review before these last couple of questions from the information that we obtained on january 6

transcribed interviews and logs from officials, we have a timeline of the authorization process of the national guard we know on january 3rd president trump ordered that the guard be ready based on intelligence that had been received. as i mentioned earlier, secretary miller did testify to the select committee he had full authorization to deploy the national guard on january 6th did not need additional authority from the president of the united states. there was a breakdown secretary miller testified that he gave in order to deploy the national guard to the capital. somewhere there was a breakdown in that order whether it was communication or a delay.

if general walker were to give you a direct order according to your oath when i joined the military you are obligated to carry out that order is that correct? any mortal legal authority given is my responsibility to carry out, yes sir. if you didn't carry out that order would that be considered a dereliction of duty? >> to take action against me, yes sir. >> do you feel it was dereliction of duty in the chain of command on january 6? >> not within the dc national guard, yes. from higher levels, yes, i do believe senior officials in the secretary the army and the army staff were derelict in relaying the authorization from secretary miller down to the appropriate level of execution which would have been major general walker. >> it's a difficult question and

i apologize, but to get to the truth we need to know what really happened. anyone that can answer this appropriately and maybe i will direct it to general dean to start with, secretary mccarthy mentioned he was making a tactical level plan. did you ever see this plan? >> the federal agency was the capital police. my question is because the capital please have the responsibility for the security of the capital. >> into that was my follow-up question because the deployment was to the capital, so did general walker ever discuss a plan?

>> i'm sorry, colonel. >> thatlan. that's what we did. was the national guard deploy as you become under the authority of the u.s. capitol police and you are sworn in. your operation plan is to get from here to there and do whatever the chief tells you. is that a good summary? >> he never acts independently. we look for somebody on the civilian side. we responded to riots in the city. secret service police or park

police. >> to make sure i understand there was a discussion a very simple plan to get on the bus and a plan you need is that what you're saying? due to the normal planning operations we already had a point identified for those within the city. all we had to do was communicate to those service members to rally at that point. everyone else said to the armory would have been donning the gear and moving towards their direction. as the colonel mentioned once we arrived, we fall under its called the defense support to civil authorities once we arrived, we fall under, we are supporting the civil authority in this case the capitol police would have given direction on

where to be and what to do. >> this is my last question. i will start with you since you were the senior member that would have been there at the time. the order that finally came. 509 did secretary mccarthy give you the order at that time, and if not can you explain how you got therder? >> the general actually gave the order but said he received from secretary mccarthy. general walker in turn told me and i in turn told them it's time to move. >> i was sitting right next to. he was conveying an order and i was told it came from secretary mccarthy and secretary miller.

the claim was not true. the conference is ongoing. what are you all doing still here? >> that's not what happened, sir. as someone said that these guys are good to go now. he claimed later he asked general walker why are you still here. he was hanging out while twiddling his thumbs.

>> mr. chairman, can i add that it all doesn't make sense if you follow the suit because major general walker had been told numerous times, had been given the order to do something. why was there never action taken for the dereliction of duty or refusing order? >> there never was there was never even an inkling. they were sitting around waiting and it's disrespectful to men and women that did that job. it is in writing. don't send him.

>> i want to thank you all i do want to enter for the record a memorandum from the secretary of the army dated january, 2021 as the employment guidance for the district of columbia national guard. also a letter from the secretary of the army to major general william walker dated january 1, 2021 recommending approval of the request of mr. christopher rodriguez the district of columbia on behalf of the support of the civil authorities of the district of columbia. without objection i recognize the ranking member. i want to also acknowledge and

say thank you to everyone that is here today. we know the chaos at the pentagon was caused by the commander-in-chief and at the domestic political affairs. i want to enter into the record of the following articles, the political article entitled trump could have helped respond to the january 6 riot but didn't come up her testimony. >> a letter dated 2022 posted on the select committee website from the select committee to the general counsel of the department of homeland security related to the disposition of interview transcripts, pages 99 to 101 of the acting secretary defense christopher miller's interview with of the select committee an article from palletta fact in which it declares a claimant that the january 6 committee suppressed testimony from anthony that approved the former president

donald trump pushed the troops of the capital and the cnn article the secretary denies that there were orders to have 10,000 troops ready to deploy on january 6th. a "washington post" article entitled the false gop claim in which he says the national guard will be activated so they can protect pro trump people. the committee to investigate the january 6 attack final report and summaries of the many capitol police inspector general reports requested identified at the leadership of the committee last congress. >> without objection. >> again i would like to thank each of our witnesses and whistleblowers for coming forth to share their story. for anyone watching who wishes to share their story, please do

not hesitate to reach out. a two hour whistleblowers, members of the committee may have additional questions and we ask that you respond to the questions in writing and each member will have five legislative days to insert additional mater into the record or revise and extend their remarks if there is no further business and without objection the subcommittee stands adjourned

[inaudible conversations]