#SeditionHunters - three weeks ago the DoD Inspector General released a Jan 6 timeline so discrepant with former statements that it couldn't fit in our timeline. Now a bombshell memo call Lt. Generals Charles Flynn and Walter Piatt "unmitigated liars". 1/ politico.com/news/2021/12/0…
Former DC National Guard Col. Earl Matthews focuses on claims that it took hours to prepare National Guard to deploy to the Capitol, says those statements “constituted the willful deception of Congress.” 2/
Maj. Gen. Walker, former commander of the DC National Guard, had immediately called for the IG report to be retracted - it threw him under the bus, claimed he got a call at 4:35 PM to deploy the Guard and sat on it til 5:08 PM. Walker says that's a lie. 3/ washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
Walker says NG was ready to go immediately, no planning needed, no reason for delay. He called the report "inaccurate", "incomplete", and "sloppy". (It is certainly sloppy, listing one phone call at both 2:20 & 2:22 PM.) Links to all documents and to our timeline will follow. 4/
For context, here is our timeline, showing both events at the Capitol and DoD / police communications, based on reports that came out soon after Jan. 6th. Link here is timeline in table form. Sources document to follow. 5/ docs.google.com/document/d/1jx…
Here's the sources document - screenshot highlights the period when DoD says Walker was called 4:35 PM; he says 5:08. Either time was too late to help much, though. The US Capitol seems saved largely by city police (DC, VA, MD) with FBI SWAT backup. 6/ docs.google.com/document/d/1yM…
The National Guard deployment in that timeline was based off a memo issued by the DoD on January 11. 7/ media.defense.gov/2021/Jan/11/20…
Here's the new DoD IG report of Nov 18. Among the odd changes: events in the crucial period from 4-4:40 PM are moved earlier by 5 minutes. Originally the 4:18 PM verbal authorization of state NG came 1 minute after Trump's "go home" Tweet at 4:17 PM... 8/ s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2111…
Politico links to another timeline, not widely known, issued by DC NG on Jan 7. It highlights (boldface, italics!) that the time from the first call for assistance til "final approval from McCarthy and Miller was two hours and fifty-six minutes" 9/ politico.com/f/?id=0000017d…
Here is the shockingly blunt memo on the DoD IG report: "at least two general officers of the Army engaged in repeated violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 907, 1001, 1621. One of these general officers [Charles Flynn] now leads an Army Service Component Command." 10/
And a possibly relevant update (h/t @visionsurreal): Former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, brother of Gen. Charles Flynn of the Matthews memo and scheduled to give his deposition to the January 6 Committee today... has been "granted [a] short postponement". 11/
A correction: Gen. Charles Flynn's rank was mis-stated in the first Tweet as Lt. Gen. Wikipedia "On November 30, 2020, [Flynn's] nomination for promotion to general was submitted to the U.S. Senate and was confirmed by voice vote of the full Senate on December 20, 2020". 12/
Timelines don't prove culpability, but they are informative, suggestive. They tell you what MIGHT have led to what. So let's add: on Nov. 25, 2020, 5 days before recommending Charles Flynn's promotion, Former Pres. Donald Trump pardoned Michael Flynn. 13/
Since we're talking NG timelines, let's re-up a puzzle: Shortly after 3:30 PM, Disclose.tv & Press secretary Kayleigh McEnany Tweeted that the National Guard was being deployed. Why? That info was rebroadcast on InfoWars, widely heard. 14/
What happened near 3:30 PM? The NG timeline suggests that Acting Def. Sec Miller issued some statement then, but there's no Miller statement in the DoD timeline. This discrepancy has been very concerning. Here are the Tweets in context, and the timing from the NG memo. 15/
The NG memo also lists a 3:31 PM event: "REDCON1 recommended by Gen. Flynn". (REDCON = "full alert"). Is this related to the deployment Tweets that come within minutes? But this event is completely absent from the DoD IG report, which has - oddly - 22 blank minutes just then. 16/
Inspectors General should be the final arbiter of truth, the watchdogs. The gaping blanks here, unexplained discrepancies with previous timelines, and internal inconsistencies are all a huge red flag, even beyond what the report says. This is not how IG reports should look. 17/
An update to unwind confusion - an exhaustive recap of Jan 6 NG decisions near 3:30 PM, h/t a helpful VA resident.
It's all initiated by Virginia & Maryland racing to help. At 3:29 PM, VA Gov. Northam posts a widely-seen Tweet that he's sending the VA Guard + state police 18/
Northam's words are repeated by Disclose.tv at 3:32 PM & shown on InfoWars at 3:34. Then at 3:36 PM, Kayleigh McEnany confusingly Tweets that "the National Guard" is coming at "Trump's direction", though no-one seems to have yet authorized state NGs to enter DC. 19/
Gen. Daniel Hokanson in DC hears of the plan to mobilize the VA NG & calls the VA Adjutant General at 3:46 PM. Then it's MD's turn: at 3:47 Gov. Hogan Tweets his plan to help & Hokanson calls their AG at 3:55. (Below is from a Jan 8 press release). 20/ defense.gov/News/Releases/…
We don't know what was said in those calls, but at least they're consistently reported in Jan. In the new IG report, though, Bowser disappears from the timeline; the 3:46 VA AG call is gone; and 3:55 PM is now "General Hokanson initiates communications with state governors." 21/
The IG report was supposed to clarify the DoD response to requests for help at the Capitol. In Jan, MD Governor Hogan expressed his frustration: "we aren't getting answers". The IG report doesn't give those answers - instead opens new questions. 22/ usatoday.com/story/news/pol…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Our new Navy Director of Communications watched the action at the Capitol on Jan 6 for Breitbart News. Her worst post might be this one: she flippantly captioned a video of people attacking the North Doors: "Things got a lil sporty here". To her it was a joke. Video tk. 1/
Here's Wong's video of the attack on the North Doors. She can claim she was just a reporter, but her caption shows that she thinks an attack on our Capitol and officers is funny. @SECNAV: is this the message you want to send to the troops, who swear to uphold the Constitution? 2/
Actual reporters, not Breitbart hacks, should ask @SecNav John Phelan: why was Kristina Wong picked? Is this the right message to send the US Navy? That attacking our own Capitol to prevent the peaceful transfer of power is just "a lil sporty"? 3/
It's clear by now: we WILL lose US democracy without a civil society pushback. Today the universities finally rose up, bluntly denouncing "undue government intrusion". The coalition is is now top-heavy with establishment heavyweights. Summary follows. 1/ theguardian.com/us-news/2025/a…
Who signed? Let's start with the Ivies. Status-worship is gross, but it matters that they're nearly all leading now:
* Ivy: Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Cornell, Penn, Brown
NOT Columbia, Dartmouth
* Ivy-plus: MIT, Duke
NOT Stanford, Univ. of Chicago
2/
continuing... universities with big research arms:
* Other elite tech:
NOT Caltech, Rice, Georgia Tech
* Big state R1s: Rutgers, U WA, U MD, U WI Madison, U HI, UC Riverside, Stony Brook
NOT U MI, UIUC, other UCs, UT, etc.
3/
When Trump's goons threatened Harvard it was clear what would happen: first PR, then lawyers. Harvard has now filed suit, solo against 8 government agencies. Two main points: 1) government did not follow procedure, 2) government cannot dictate speech. 1/ harvard.edu/research-fundi…
As you'd expect, Harvard has also put out a smooth letter explaining their lawsuit. It starts by outlining the 5 attacks Trump has made on Harvard. Then pivots to defending research. Then thoughts on antisemitism - giving Trump an offramp he could take. 2/ harvard.edu/president/news…
More careful work: Harvard has kept the 2 ultra-Trumpy lawyers originally hired to negotiate, but added 14 more from 2 specialty law firms: Ropes & Gray, experts in life sciences & pharma research, and Lehotsky Keller Cohn, experts in federal regulations. Choose your fighter. 3/
The public needs to learn how Kristi Noem, a cabinet official with Secret Service protection, got her purse snatched with DHS badge, passport, maybe phone: now a security risk. If she'd asked the SS to stand down for privacy, we need to know who was she having dinner with. 1/
Either #1: Noem had an intimate restaurant dinner (on Easter?) she felt was so important she put US security at risk. Or, #2: Noem didn't ask the Secret Service to back off, and our elite agency let a purse-snatcher get within arm's length of a cabinet secretary. Or.. 2/
Or, #3: everyone is lying and something else happened that resulted in Noem losing her badge and passport. We cannot know without more reporting. Reporters should not let this story get lost in the deluge of scandal. It needs follow-up. 3/
The Trump admin now CLAIMS to have made a mistake. Not "acknowledges". Trump's clowns sent a letter signed by 3 government officials, got the predictable response (mighty Harvard swung into battle), tried to amplify and flopped, and so now are whining it's all Harvard's fault. 1/
The NYT article is pretty good. It repeats admin claims, but makes it clear that they're in chaos. They know they messed up and are scrambling. Predictably, Harvard had been negotiating, before that letter - but it sent them into battle. Unpaywalled link: archive.is/YsHpJ
The timeline: as soon as Harvard rolled out their resistance PR on Monday, the Trump admin knew they blew it. Immediately tried to walk it back. Harvard says no. On Wednesday, they escalated the threats. Still no. Now they're down to complaining it's all Harvard's fault. 3/
A new attack on Harvard, another attempt to impose government control. Trump first tried with $: canceling researchers' grants, threatening taxes. Now an attack via visas: to deport ALL Harvard's international students (38% of PhDs doing lab research). 1/ thecrimson.com/article/2025/4…
Trump's demand, again, is a classic from the fascist playbook: to force Harvard to monitor its students and report to the US government. This visa threat can't be countered with money. But Trump is missing one key issue. Many Harvard international undergrads are global elites. 2/
Harvard educates the children of Saudi sheiks and Russian oligarchs and Greek shipping magnates. Deporting the PhD students would cripple Harvard research. Deporting the UGs would alienate powerful people across the world, people whose respect Trump craves. He may not dare. 3/