total-news-1024x279-1__1_-removebg-preview.png

LANGUAGE

‘Lawfare’: Gov’t rejects Steve Baker’s gun request over his ‘alleged threatening statements’ at ‘public officials’ on Jan. 6

On January 6, the federal government rejected a pretrial request by Blaze News investigative journalist Steve Baker to lift gun restrictions on him over his “alleged threats against public officials.”

Baker’s pretrial services staff cited “safety concerns” about Baker’s possession of a gun, according to minutes from Washington, D.C., federal Judge Christopher R. Cooper. Baker added that such concerns were “heightened” by Baker’s “alleged threatening comments directed at certain public servants during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot.” I covered this as a journalist.

“The government is telling Steve that because of the words he said that day, he cannot exercise his Second Amendment rights and cannot protect himself. What are those words? Who was threatened? ?

Cooper also announced that Baker would lift the requirement to notify pretrial services before entering Washington, D.C., “given the seriousness of the illegal activities that allegedly took place inside the Capitol on January 6.” rejected the motion. It is said to have targeted high-ranking members of Congress.

What is your background?

Baker pleaded not guilty last month to four nonviolent misdemeanor charges brought by the Justice Department in connection with the Jan. 6 reporting at the U.S. Capitol. Mr. Baker is seeking the truth about what was going on behind the scenes that day, and he believes he is. The US government is targeting him for that reason.

After being told he was being indicted, Baker arrived at the FBI field office in Dallas on March 1 and turned himself in. He was then arrested, handcuffed and charged with:

  • knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority;
  • Disorderly and disruptive behavior in restricted buildings or grounds
  • Acts that disrupt the order inside the National Diet Building
  • Parades, demonstrations, and picketing inside the Capitol

Baker and others have strongly criticized the charges against him. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) himself asked in a March op-ed, “Where’s the anger over Steve Baker’s prosecution?”

Additionally, shortly after Baker’s arrest, Blaze Media released never-before-seen information. video It shows Mr. Baker’s movements in and around the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, and appears to be in stark contrast to the stories the federal government has spread about him.

The 47-minute video includes footage from Baker’s cellphone camera that recorded what happened inside the Capitol, as well as footage from newly released surveillance cameras at the Capitol. Blaze TV It was obtained primarily through the efforts of Loudermilk. He and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) have made it a priority to provide access to the Jan. 6 video.

Here is an unfiltered video of Baker just before he entered the Capitol, his movements inside the building, and after he left. Content warning: language:

Steve Baker inside the Capitol on January 6thyoutube.be

Mr Baker discussed his legal issues in two commentaries published in Blaze News in October (here and here), following his work as an independent journalist on January 6, prior to joining Blaze. details of the federal investigation. news.

limit

Mr Baker told Blaze News that when he first appeared before Mr Cooper in a virtual hearing last month, there was “substantial discussion” about his pre-trial restrictions, which Mr Cooper had previously told Mr Baker. It was related to an order to comply with restrictions, he said. Mr. Baker, on the other hand, maintained that he had been compliant all along.

Still, Baker sounded upbeat in April and was confident things would be resolved, telling Blaze News that “the government is working with my lawyers to amend the wording of certain restrictions.”

Baker told Blaze News that until recently he carried a gun for self-defense because of threats he received online. That concern, Baker said, was developed by several disturbing encounters in which Baker said people actually came looking for him.

However, Cooper said in minutes released Tuesday that “with respect to firearm restrictions, Pretrial Services has notified the court that it opposes this request for a delay due to safety concerns, and the court has determined that the restrictions are necessary to ensure safety.” The number of pretrial services personnel who may be required to make home visits or visit defendants without warning. “These safety concerns are heightened by Mr. Baker’s alleged threatening comments directed at certain public officials during the January 6, 2021 riot,” Cooper added. Ta.

The problem, Baker told Blaze News, is that until recently he carried a gun for self-defense because of threats he received online — a concern Baker said , which unfolded over several unsettling encounters during which Baker said people actually came looking for him.

cooper did It granted Baker’s request to amend the requirement that “all contacts with law enforcement be reported.” Mr. Baker will no longer be liable for any suspicions of his own wrongdoing (i.e., he is suspected of, accused of, or accused of violating any law).

“My blood boiled.”

Mr Baker told Blaze News that he had broken down his disagreement with this week’s ruling, saying: “This is the second of many minor orders from Judge Cooper, both of which made my blood boil.” My lawyer is advising me to be prepared for days like this to continue. In both cases, these detailed instructions are based in Washington, D.C., which I have never met. My North Carolina PSO is great, and he even said he doesn’t consider me a risk at all, apparently done on the advice of the pretrial services officer I put in. It therefore appears that the DC PSO is only advising the court by rote. ”

In response to Cooper’s statement that Baker “allegedly made threatening statements directed at certain public officials during the riot on January 6, 2021,” Baker told Blaze News, “On January 6, 2021, There were no threatening comments made at all on the day, and they were certainly not directed at any particular public official.” . ” It’s as if Judge Cooper hasn’t yet taken the time to understand the basics of my case. I already had that impression when Cooper was surprised to learn that I was a working journalist for the Blaze. news. “

Baker told Blaze News he also took issue with Cooper’s denial of a motion to lift the requirement to notify pretrial services before entering Washington, D.C. He announced the rankings of members of Congress. ”

Mr. Baker responded to this claim by saying:

First, there was no illegal activity while at the Capitol. none. Second, a video of me jokingly calling Nancy Pelosi a “bitch” happened while we were sharing an adult drink at a hotel in Virginia after I left the Capitol. . This is a new case law that I’m not familiar with, where using a non-threatening derogatory term when referring to a “senior” member of Congress over a drink is grounds for restricting travel to Washington, D.C. Is that what it is? If so, courts should never allow non-residents to visit our nation’s capital.

The bottom line is that Judge Cooper took the highly unusual step of issuing a detailed order even though he made no reference to my attorney’s arguments in the motion. Instead, he simply parroted what an anonymous pretrial services worker had said in response to my complaint.

And Cooper does not mention the fact that in the government’s response to my complaint, Assistant U.S. Attorney Anita Eve had the audacity to say,Participation in the District of Columbia is not a “right.” My attorney, William Shipley, a former federal prosecutor for more than 20 years, emphasized the absurdity of the government’s response. X: “This challenge is some of the weakest legal work I’ve seen come out of the Department of Justice over the past 30-plus months.”

Because Cooper has chosen to completely ignore the allegations in my complaint, we plan to file an expedited appeal.

Blaze Media Editor-in-Chief Matthew Peterson also slammed Tuesday’s ruling.

What the government is doing to Steve is a violation of political law. I uploaded a video of Steve at the Capitol on January 6th to YouTube. What he said and did there is a matter of public record. The government has told Steve that because of what he said that day, he cannot exercise his Second Amendment rights or protect himself. What is the word? Who was threatened? And if the punishment for calling Nancy Pelosi a bitch while sitting with friends is a “threat” that requires gun control, then yeah, they need to start processing me There are millions of people.

An exclusive Blaze News article from March detailed the federal government’s specific condemnation of Baker’s behavior on January 6, all of which called into question the government’s conclusions. It seems to be contrasted with video evidence.

What has Baker revealed so far?

Baker began investigative reporting for Blaze News last fall. His first analysis of January 6th for Blaze News came in October of last year, after countless hours in a House subcommittee office poring over frame after frame of the closed-circuit video of January 6th. It was conducted. And it made him wonder: Did Capitol Police Special Agent David Lazarus commit perjury in the Oath Keepers trial?

Mr. Baker’s investigative work also led to two additional analyzes focusing on Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn. “January 6th and the N-word it wasn’t” and “Harry Dunn’s description of January 6th doesn’t add up. At all.”

In December, Baker claimed to have discovered significant misconduct involving Dunn, the Capitol Police, the media and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.).

In January, Baker claimed that newly released closed-circuit television video clips from the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 show Lazarus gave false testimony during the Oath Keepers trial.

Proof of perjury | The truth of January 6thyoutube.be

Also in January, Baker and others asked what the U.S. government had to hide about the pipe bomb discovered at Democratic National Committee headquarters on January 6th.

In February, Baker wrote another analysis titled “Capitol Police diverted all but one CCTV cameras from DNC pipe bomb probe,” and later that month asked why Kamala Harris was arrested on Jan. 6. I asked if he was at the DNC and not the Capitol.

Congressman Loudermilk, chairman of the House Administration Committee Oversight Subcommittee, told Blaze Media co-founders in March: glenn beck The FBI and Justice Department are pursuing Mr. Baker over his Jan. 6 report because “he is aware of something” that the federal government wants to keep secret.

Additionally, Republican House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan launched an investigation into the Justice Department in March over Baker’s treatment. In a scathing letter to Matthew Graves, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Jordan called out the Justice Department’s “selective prosecution” of Baker’s arrest and “the department’s violation of journalists’ First Amendment rights.” He outlined his “serious concerns” regarding the “Efforts”.

In his letter, Jordan requested that Graves provide the following by no later than 5 p.m. on March 26:

  • All documents and communications related to Baker’s arrest.
  • All documents and communications related to the investigation, prosecution, and arrest of other journalists who covered January 6th.
  • All documents and communications related to the Department of Justice’s decision to require pretrial detention of defendants charged in connection with January 6th, and defendants who are currently or were in pretrial detention on January 6th.

Jordan’s letter concludes by reminding Graves that the Judiciary Committee has “oversight authority” over the Justice Department on matters “related to civil liberties.”

Baker told Blaze News that Jordan’s request has not yet been met, according to Judiciary Committee officials.

Baker wrote another analysis in April titled “Overreach prosecution tactics face high court scrutiny in Jan. 6 case,” in which he wrote, “The Department of Justice “They could easily use laws designed to destroy evidence to defeat them.”

Journalist Steve Baker tells the truth behind the recent high-profile arrest of J6youtube.be

Do you like Blaze News? Avoid censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get articles like this delivered straight to your inbox. Please register here!

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
Telegram
WhatsApp