“We are investigating the alleged failures within USCP IICD leading up to January 6 to assess what legislative reforms, if any, are needed,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), chair of the House Administration Oversight Subcommittee, told Farnam in a letter that she received late Friday.
The subpoena sets up a confrontation between two pivotal — if somewhat under-the-radar — figures in the Jan. 6 attack saga, which three-and-a-half years on remains an unresolved matter for many Americans.
Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia speaks on the last day of the annual "Road To Majority Policy Conference" held by the Faith & Freedom Coalition at the at the Gaylord Opryland Resort & Convention Center June 18, 2022 in Nashville, Tenn. (Photo by Seth Herald/Getty Images)
Loudermilk personally led a tour of the U.S. House buildings complex on Jan. 5, 2021 — the day before the attack on the Capitol — involving people who traveled to Washington, D.C., to support then-President Donald Trump’s effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
ALSO READ: 8 ways convicted felon Donald Trump doesn't become president
Farnam served as assistant director of the Intelligence and Interagency Coordination Division at the Capitol Police at the time of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack.
Raw Storyexclusively reported last month that Farnam anticipated being called before the subcommittee.
Farnam previously told Raw Story last that she believes Loudermilk is dragging her before the subcommittee as a way to deflect from his own role in the events of Jan. 6.
“I think he does have some involvement in January 6th,” she said, “and these hearings are designed to distract from the truth.”
A prescient warning
Farnam wrote an intelligence assessment on Jan. 3 that provided a prescient warning about the threat of violence by Trump supporters who were becoming increasingly unhinged due to the looming certification of the election.
“This sense of desperation and disappointment may lead to more of an incentive to become violent,” Farnam’s assessment warned. “Unlike previous post-election protests, the targets of the pro-Trump supporters are not necessarily counter-protestors, as they were previously, but, rather, Congress itself is the target on the 6th.”
Farnam gave a briefing to commanders, including then-Assistant Chief Yogananda Pittman, on Jan. 4, telling them, according to her recollection: “Stop the Steal has the propensity for attracting white supremacists, militia groups, groups like the Proud Boys. There are multiple social media posts saying that people are going to be coming armed, and it’s potentially a very dangerous situation.”
ALSO READ: Biden in hot water with AOC: ‘It’s wrong. It’s not okay.’
Farnam and others who have previously spoken to the now-disbanded House Select January 6 Committee said there were no questions after her presentation.
Sean Gallagher, now assistant chief of police for uniformed operations, told the House Select January 6 Committee that it was fair to say that Farnam’s warning did not prompt the Capitol Police to make any operational changes.
By the time thousands of pro-Trump protesters began breaching a U.S. Capitol security perimeter on Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol Police were overwhelmed and unable to stop throngs of people who illegally entered the Capitol complex, and in many cases, injured law enforcement officials, terrorized members of Congress, stole government property and trashed the premises.
Despite Farnam’s efforts to warn commanders of the threat of violence on Jan. 6, the Republican-led subcommittee chaired by Loudermilk has faulted her for the security breakdown at the Capitol that day.
Capitol rioters Capitol rioters on Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Saul Loeb for AFP)
An “initial findings” report released by Loudermilk’s subcommittee in March complained that the most alarming content was “buried” near the end of Farnam’s intelligence assessment, while blaming the intelligence division for leaving the Capitol Police leadership “uninformed and unable to properly plan.”
Meanwhile, the Republican majority has given former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who was aware of the Jan. 4 conference call but did not attend, a sympathetic hearing.
Sund testified before the subcommittee last September that “no intel agencies or units sounded the alarm.”
“We were blindsided,” he said. “Intelligence failed operations.”
Shifting blame away from Trump
The Republican majority’s favorable treatment of Sund compared to Farnam falls under a larger effort to shift blame from Trump, who summoned supporters to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 with the promise that it would be “wild.”
Republicans — some of whom have downplayed the violence at the U.S. Capitol altogether — have attempted to shift blame to then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who fled the Capitol alongside other members of Congress as violent Trump supporters disrupted and delayed Congress’ certification of 2020 presidential electoral votes.
The topline of the subcommittee’s interim report accuses the House Select January 6 Committee, which Pelosi appointed, of pursuing a “pre-determined narrative that President Trump was responsible for the breach.”
ALSO READ: How Donald Trump could run for president — and lead the nation — from prison
Instead, the report by the Loudermilk subcommittee blames the attack on the “politicization” of the U.S. Capitol security apparatus. They accuse Pelosi of exerting political pressure on Capitol security operations through the House sergeant at arms, whose duties as chief law enforcement and protocol officer for the House include maintaining order and assessing threats.
The report also includes a section complaining that the House Select January 6 Committee “made unfounded allegations against members of Congress” and “specifically targeted Subcommittee Chairman Barry Loudermilk.”
In a public letter to Loudermilk, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) noted that video of Loudermilk’s Jan. 5, 2021, tour of the Capitol showed individuals filming hallways, staircases and security checkpoints.
Thompson noted that some of the individuals attended Trump’s stop-the-steal rally at the Ellipse the next day, including one who was captured on video noting that the Capitol was “surrounded” and that the rioters were “coming” for Pelosi and other Democratic members.
The subpoena calls for Farnam to appear for a deposition before the subcommittee at the O’Neill House Office Building on June 21.
Under the subcommittee rules, only Farnam, her lawyer, subcommittee members and their staff, and an official reporter may attend the deposition.
"Aw, such a big man @RepLoudermilk!" Farnam wrote Friday evening in a post on X. "You feel so big and strong? Remember when you were asked to speak to Congress about #J6 and were too cowardly to do so? I do. I'll show for your deposition. One of us has some balls."
Aw, such a big man @RepLoudermilk! You feel so big and strong? Remember when you were asked to speak to Congress about #J6 and were too cowardly to do so? I do. I'll show for your deposition. One of us has some balls. #january6th#insurrection#revisionisthistory
— Julie Farnam (@JulieFarnam) June 14, 2024
Farnam — today a candidate in the Democratic primary for an open seat on the Arlington County Board in northern Virginia, which will be decided on June 18 — previously told Raw Story that she is concerned that by deposing her behind closed doors, the Republican majority will be able to cherry-pick her words “and construe it however they want.”
Under the subcommittee rules, the Democratic minority members may object to the selective release of testimony, transcripts or recordings. But such concerns would be resolved by a vote of the subcommittee, where Republicans hold the majority.
The rules provide members of the Republican majority and Democratic minority equal time to question Farnam.
