Blaze investigative reporter Steve Baker faces four misdemeanors related to the Capitol Hill riot on January 6.
Notice that the wording does not mention reporting, journalism, or media. This is important.
Baker learned about the charges this week when the FBI told him to surrender on Friday morning. But no one told him the actual charges until he appeared in court. His lawyer also implied the treatment is because of his coverage over the past three years:
Baker’s Dallas attorney, James Lee Bright, added to Blaze News that withholding the nature of the charges against his client was a “really unusual” move.Bright told Blaze News that he’s “disturbed” about what’s happening with his client, especially given that Baker has been “in full compliance” all this time. Bright also said the federal government “three-plus years later going after people who were legitimate functioning journalists that day” appears designed to have an “absolute chilling effect.”Baker added that when he asked his other attorney, William Shipley, why the federal government is treating him like this, Shipley replied, “You know why. You’ve been poking them in the eye for three years.”
The agency told him to show up in “shorts and sandals,” but he appeared in a suit and tie.
Blaze Media editor-in-chief Matthew Peterson said:
“He’s had unknown charges hanging over his head for years, but after we started working with him the government sprang back into action. There is no need to put him in a jumpsuit or handcuffs except as a humiliation ritual or a show, which seems to be exactly what they are planning on doing on Friday,” Peterson said.“We will be showing the world footage from January 6 that shows Steve was clearly present that day as an independent journalist. Government retaliation such as this against journalists contradicts the very idea of a free press, the purpose of our form of government, and what once was the American way of life,” Peterson added.
Baker documented January 6 in a post on October 2. He worked as an investigative journalist but not with the Blaze on January 6.
Baker told readers the government had been investigating him for two years. The second sentence is the shocker:
Last Wednesday morning, my attorney spoke with FBI Special Agent Craig Noyes, one of the lead investigators in my case. He confirmed that the Department of Justice is continuing its probe into my journalistic activities on January 6, 2021.
“Like many other reporters and photojournalists — both independents and those working directly for established media companies — I followed the story that day where it went,” continued Baker. “And it happened to be inside the Capitol Building. Depending on who is doing the counting, between 100 and 200 journalists were either already inside the Capitol, covering the event from restricted grounds, or followed the crowd inside.”
It surprised Baker to find that the left-wing group Sedition Hunters, which has documented the journalists/reporters on January 6, didn’t list him. he contacted the group, but the people ignored him and blocked him on social media.
Baker never hid what he saw or did on January 6. He wrote a blog post, gave interviews, and uploaded commentary on YouTube.
The FBI contacted him on June 22, 2021. Thank goodness Baker brought his attorney to a voluntary meeting in August 2021.
The agents acknowledged Baker’s profession as a member of the press, stating that they needed “special permission” to conduct the meeting. Important fact is highlighted:
According to the Code of Federal Regulations, a federal investigative agency must first secure “authorization by a United States Attorney or Assistant Attorney General” before conducting an interview with a member of the media.My lawyer and the U.S. attorney’s office then negotiated a proffer agreement for my voluntary interview, which said in effect that nothing I said in the interview could be used against me should I be charged with a crime unless I perjured myself. Keep that in mind.
The agents even thanked Baker “for not doing violence against law enforcement on January 6.”
However, the first threat included charges of racketeering and property damage:
“Well, that’s the weird part,” my attorney continued. “According to the criminal statutes she sent — 18 USC 1952 (a)(1)-(2) and 40 USC 5104 (e)(2)(d) and (g) — you’re being charged with interstate racketeering and property damage.”“What?!”To the first charge, the only thing we could surmise is that during the FBI interview, I had been asked how much money I had made from the licensing of my January 6 videos. Several of my video clips had been used in January 6 documentaries produced by HBO and the New York Times, as well as by news services all over the world.Was the federal government really trying to claim that I had traveled from Raleigh, N.C., to Washington, D.C., with the foreknowledge of a criminal event and conspired with others to profit from it?All I could do was laugh.As to the second charge, I’d informed the agents during the interview that at one point while inside the Capitol, I stood on a bench to get above the crowd to get a better camera angle on the crowd’s activities. Agent Noyes asked, “You stood on a bench?” He then feverishly wrote something on his notepad.
Baker tweeted on Thursday:
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY