A former D.C. National Guard official is accusing two senior Army leaders of lying to Congress and participating in a secret attempt to rewrite the history of the military's response to the Capitol riot.
The Pentagon's inspector general is being criticized by a former Pentagon official for a report that protects a top Army official who argued against sending the National Guard.
The memo was sent to the select committee on Jan. 6 and contains recollections of the insurrection response. The chaos of the Capitol siege has never been discussed by Matthews.
Matthews was the top attorney to the commanding general of the D.C. National Guard. Walker's previous congressional testimony about the hourslong delay in the military's order for the D.C. National Guard to deploy to the riot scene was amplified by Matthews' memo.
The D.C. Guard wanted to respond to the riot at the seat of government before they were given permission to do so. He said that D.C. guard officials stunned watching in the Armory during the first hours of the attack on Congress.
The memo states that Flynn and Piatt lied to Congress about their response to pleas for the D.C. Guard.
The Washington Post reported that Walker called for the inspector general to back off on its report on the events of January 6. Walker objected to specific allegations by the Pentagon watchdog that Matthews' memo also criticizes, calling the inspector general's report "inaccurate" and "sloppy work."
Walker, the former head of the D.C. Guard, said the report speaks for itself and that he had nothing to add. A committee spokesman declined to speak.
The new memo from Matthews, who now serves in the Army reserves, emerges as officials involved in the response that day try to explain their decision-making to investigators. The House oversight panel heard testimony from top officials earlier this year about the attack.
Matthews said the memo he wrote is accurate. He said that the Army has never failed them. Some of our Army leaders failed us on January 6th. They lied about it and tried to cover it up. They tried to destroy a good man.
Flynn and Piatt didn't reply to messages. Mike Brady said in a statement that the service's actions on January 6th have been reported on, and that Gen. Flynn and Lt. Gen. Piatt have been open, honest and thorough in their sworn testimony.
Brady said that the actions taken were appropriate, supported by requirements, and compliant with laws, regulations, and other applicable guidance. We reject any allegations to the contrary, and stand by all testimony. It would be inappropriate to comment further on the January 6th Commission investigation.
A 2:30 call.
Matthews focused on a 2:30 p.m. conference call that included senior military and law enforcement officials, himself and Walker. The Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund called for the deployment of the National Guard to the Capitol after rioters broke into the building, according to Matthews. Walker told Congress that Sund made that plea. Flynn and Piatt were against the move.
Flynn was the Army's director of operations and Piatt was the director of Army staff. The highest-ranking Army officials spoke on the 2:30 call, according to Matthews.
The D.C. National Guard would not be allowed to deploy to the Capitol at that time, as recommended by Lieutenant General Piatt and Lieutenant General Flynn.
Piatt and Flynn suggested Guardsmen take over D.C. police officers traffic duties so they could head to the Capitol.
POLITICO obtained a document produced by a D.C. Guard official and dated Jan. 7 that laid out a timeline of Jan. 6. The D.C. Guard timeline said that Piatt and Flynn should have been sent to the Capitol.
Flynn told the D.C. National Guard to stand down until the request was routed.
Everyone on the call was surprised except for Piatt and Flynn.
The men denied to Congress that they had said the Guard shouldn't go to the Capitol.
In June, Piatt responded to a question from the House Oversight Committee about whether he told anyone not to deploy to the Capitol.
Matthews says in his memo that the statement is false and misleading.
Walker told Congress in March that Piatt and Flynn were concerned about theoptics.
Flynn never expressed a concern about the visuals, image or public perception of the Guardsmen going to the Capitol.
Matthews says in his memo that the answer is wrong.
Matthews and Walker heard Flynn say that the National Guard presence on Capitol Hill was an issue for him. It would not look good. Either Piatt or Flynn mentioned peaceful protestors.
Michael Flynn advocated for martial law and a host of other conspiracy theories before Donald Trump took office. Matthews does not suggest that Gen. Charles Flynn's actions were influenced by his brother.
The two generals told the House oversight committee that the Guard wasn't ready to respond to the chaos that day, and Flynn testified to the House Oversight Committee in June that a "team of over 40 officers and non-commissioned officers immediately worked to recall the 154 D.C. National
Matthews says that assertion constituted the willful deception of Congress.
Flynn's statement does not constitute the willful and deliberate misleading of Congress, according to Matthews. The 154 D.C. Guardsmen who were already on duty were trained in civil disturbance response and area familiarization but were delayed because of the Pentagon's inertia.
The idea that it took 40 officers to get 154 National Guard personnel ready to go to the Capitol beggars belief, according to Matthews.
Matthews writes that every D.C. Guard leader was desperate to get to the Capitol to help. The D.C. National Guard's statutory mission is responding to civil unrest in Washington.
Their attitude was that what they do is what they do. The memo continues.
The D.C. Guard was used to protect federal buildings when civil unrest erupted after George Floyd's murder. It was a break from the norm.
Matthews memo paints an incomplete picture of how the Army's top leadership responded. D.C. National Guard leaders at times had trouble finding the Army Secretary because Matthews didn't have firsthand knowledge of what he was doing.
Where was Ryan McCarthy?
Matthews' memo attempts to show the errors in the Pentagon inspector general report released last month, while taking issue with the Pentagon watchdog's timeline regarding the actions and involvement of key figures in the response.
McCarthy had to call Walker twice to order him to deploy the D.C. Guard. McCarthy was incommunicado or unreachable for most of the afternoon, according to Matthews.
McCarthy arrived at the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department at 4:05 p.m., and witnesses told the inspector general that they had not heard from Walker. McCarthy and others drafted a plan for the Guard's deployment, according to the Pentagon watchdog.
Miller and Milley reviewed the plan over the phone, according to the report. McCarthy held a press conference with the D.C. mayor after Miller authorized the deployment of the Guard.
In his memo, Matthews challenges the Jan. 6 timetable. He writes that D.C. Guard leaders haven't seen the plan developed by McCarthy and approved by Miller. The idea that the Army secretary would give the Guard personnel support for tactical planning and coordination is patently absurd.
Walker said there was no call between him and McCarthy. The D.C. National Guard did not document a phone call between McCarthy and Walker.
McCarthy and Miller did not comment.
The Pentagon inspector general's office stands by its report, according to Megan Reed.
'Stalinist Propaganda'
Matthews' memo contains a document titled "Report of the Army's Operations on January 6 2021," which has never been fully revealed. Matthews believes that the Army's reputation was damaged by the fabricated timeline.
According to Matthews, Piatt helped produce the document after a series of congressional hearings and news reports that damaged the reputations of Army senior leadership.
In March of 2021, a friend of Walker told Walker that Piatt was upset with him and that he directed the development of an Army White Paper to retell events of 6 January in a way that would be more favorable to Flynn, Piatt, Secretary McCarthy and the Army.
The end product, a revisionist tract worthy of the best Stalinist or North Korea propagandist, was kept secret from the public.
The document has been seen by members of Congress. During a House Oversight Committee hearing in June, Piatt mentioned it when asked about conflicting recollections of the afternoon of January 6.
The U.S. Army Report of Operations was submitted to the committee on January 6. The D.C. National Guard did a great job. Two minutes is too long when people are on the line. We weren't prepared to respond to that urgent request. We had to re-prep so we could go for this new mission.
