![]() The Norfolk memo referenced “an online thread discuss specific calls for violence” against members of Congress. D’Antuono did acknowledge that the FBI had received a report from its Norfolk field office indicating plans for violence at the Capitol, contradicting his statements four days earlier that the FBI had no information in its possession indicating that the pro-Trump events would be anything other than a lawful demonstration. Attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin, skirted around the issue of what the FBI knew before the attack. The individuals who were there, D’Antuono and Acting U.S. 6.” At the first press conference following January 6, held six days after the attack, neither Director Wray nor the Acting Attorney General, Jeffrey Rosen, were present – a notable absence in the aftermath of a domestic terrorist attack of this magnitude. ![]() Within two days of the assault on the Capitol, Director of the Washington field office, Steve D’Antuono “had told reporters … that the FBI had no intelligence suggesting that violence was brewing before Jan. Indications that the FBI did not have a coherent answer to the Bureau’s actions and awareness preceding the January 6 attack was evident from the beginning. That, to date, FBI Director Christopher Wray has not taken action to address the problem internally also suggests that congressional oversight committees may need to get involved and demand answers. If the picture painted by these sources is true, it suggests an internal, long-brewing problem that the FBI needs to investigate and nip in the bud. The evidence presented by the January 6 Committee, combined with reporting over the last year, offer clues into what may be going on behind the scenes at the Bureau. That’s a factor which, it stands to reason, may have played a role in the lack of proactive measures taken by the FBI in the face of multiple warnings of potential violence on January 6. However, these victories have masked what appears to be internal resistance by at least a small minority of agents who believe that the January 6 investigations are unjustified or overblown. It has helped bring to justice hundreds of the “foot soldiers” from January 6 as well two organized militia groups – the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys – indicating that by and large agents across all field offices are following their constitutional duty to uphold the law without fear or favor. To be sure, the Bureau has done a commendable job over the last eighteen months. It is time to focus similar attention on the FBI. Secret Service who sympathized with, and since minimized their advanced knowledge of, the violent assault on the Capitol on January 6. Much attention has been paid to the troubling institutional culture among agents at the U.S.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |