Blaze News original: Remember when gaslighting elitists called Antifa a myth? Here's a reminder that Antifa is all too real.



In July 2020, far-left U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) — chairman of the House Judiciary Committee at that time — said on camera incredulously that Antifa violence that had been documented night after night that summer in Portland, Oregon, is a "myth."

A month before, U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) — who now chairs the Judiciary Committee — blasted Nadler for calling Antifa "imaginary."

But it does no good for those who sit in power on the far left to acknowledge Antifa's lawlessness because its militant, psychotic pseudo-soldiers do the dirty work of leftist elites.

"They're not imaginary; they're real," Jordan said to House members, adding that "to have the chair of the Judiciary Committee, on the House floor, say ... these words ... 'imaginary things like Antifa.' They are far from imaginary. And there are people in every major city in this country who know that, and yet the chair of the Judiciary Committee just made that statement. That is scary."

What's more, during a September 2020 presidential debate, then-Democrat nominee Joe Biden told then-President Donald Trump that FBI director Christopher Wray said "Antifa's an idea, not an organization."

While Wray confirmed in testimony before Congress earlier in September 2020 that "Antifa is a real thing," he did say it's "not a group or an organization. It's a movement, or an ideology may be one way of thinking of it."

Well, readers of Blaze News know all too well that Antifa is all too real. We know for a fact that the collection of violent, black-clad left-wing militants is organized in regional and local groups throughout the U.S. — and they view it as their calling to attack police, set fires, destroy property, and roam the streets looking to intimidate all those who get in their way.

Rose City Antifa brutally attacks an unidentified conservative-aligned man at Pioneer Courthouse Square in Portland, Oregon, June 29, 2019.Photo by Moriah Ratner/Getty Images

Andy Ngo, a Portland-based journalist, is seen covered in unknown substance after unidentified Rose City Antifa members attacked him on June 29, 2019 in Portland, Oregon. Photo by Moriah Ratner/Getty Images

But it does no good for those who sit in power on the far left to acknowledge Antifa and its lawlessness because Antifa members — psychotic pseudo-soldiers one and all — do the dirty work of leftist elites.

The following are a few stark reminders of why it's still crucial to deal swiftly and harshly with Antifa.

Antifa militants caught on stealth video after street 'action' gathering in group to discuss strategy — and they warn each other to keep things secret


Conservative radio host Jason Rantz of KTTH-AM posted truly enlightening cellphone video — apparently recorded on the sly — showing a group of "radical activists, including Antifa" holding an outdoor meeting in Seattle on the night of April 16, 2021, following their usual violent street hijinks.

During their chat, the "comrades" — a term actually uttered by one freedom fighter in the clip — discuss strategy, pat themselves on the back after they "fought with the pigs," and emphasize not to discuss with anyone that they've met or their activities, as well as other methods to keep authorities at bay.

Shockingly, one militant tells the group that "autonomous doesn't mean unorganized. So we do have to make decisions as a crew, as a team." Seriously, since when do "myths" and "ideas" band together like ... an organization?

Another militant suggests that next time out, they divide themselves into groups dressed as "black bloc" and "plain clothes" in order to prevent police from identifying members according to attire. In addition, another militant reminds members to look at the "Seattle [Black Lives Matter] calendar" and other groups' activities to keep informed.

Prior to departing, one militant adds, "Once we de-bloc and leave, you weren't at this autonomous action. So you don't go home and talk about it. You didn't see anything; you didn't talk to anybody." Another group member chimes in, "Our general policy is, 'I didn't see s**t or know s**t.' If somebody asks you what you did Friday night — 'nothin'.'"

Others also offer tips about phones, primarily to keep them turned off, to "get a burner if you can," to avoid phones "tied to you personally," and to make them password-protected with "no bio, no face, no thumb."

Toward the end, another woman tells the group, "While we're not necessarily out in the streets every night, we are doing actions every night. We're sharing information, we're watching livestreams, we're educating ourselves, we're educating our peers, our families, our friends. So keep that momentum up." She adds that there's plenty to be done to aid the "revolution."

The militants also express a desire for "more organization" as well as concerns about being "infiltrated," especially since they're in a "vulnerable location" and "the longer we stay here, the easier it is for them to start picking out people as they walk out."

Trump supporter infiltrates Antifa group, collects recordings of 'comrades' making threats against police: 'Let's kill some cops'


A supporter of former President Donald Trump told KGO-TV that he infiltrated an Antifa group in Sonoma County, California, and collected recordings of the far-left violent militants making threats against police and even preparing major action for May 1, 2021 — also known as May Day.

Here's a sampling:

Group Leader: "It's May Day, baby, like come out and take, take somethin' over with us, I don't, I don't [bleep]-ing know."
Member: "Let's kill people [laughs]."
Group Leader: "Let's kill some cops."

The Trump supporter who infiltrated Antifa appeared on camera in an interview with the station, but his face and voice were disguised. He told KGO he saved messages, documents, and recordings of the Antifa group's meetings.

You can view a video report about the infiltration here; it includes KGO's interview with the Trump supporter who infiltrated Antifa.

The infiltrator gave KGO the group's "target list," which included former Santa Rosa Police Officer Barry Brodd, who testified for the defense as an expert on use of force in the murder trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the killing of George Floyd.

Four days after Brodd's testimony defending Chauvin, the station said masked figures in black threw a severed pig head and pig blood at the house where Brodd used to live.

The infiltrator told the station, "So I saw that they were here, I read their manifesto, and I could tell that they were a threat to the community, and somebody needed to do something about this."

More from KGO:

The manifesto posted online for SoCo [Sonoma County] Radical Action or SRA says, "Do not hesitate, do not wait ... the brick in the street is meant to be thrown! The paint in the can is meant to be sprayed! The cop in your head is meant to be killed!"

The Trump supporter was able to join the group that communicates through the encrypted messaging app Wickr.

The infiltrator added to the station that, "I said, 'Comrade, you know ... I want to smash the system the same as you,' [to] make them not feel alone, because that's what they really want to hear, to know that there's more people like them."

More from KGO:

The I-Team has learned the group's leader who goes by the screen name "Marb" is a 25-year-old college student, who was arrested for "felony assault on a police officer" last year at this Oakland riot after the death of George Floyd; the district attorney declined to file charges. The Trump supporter says he made this recording in March, when Marb discussed naming the group "SoCo Antifa." [...]

The infiltrator tells the I-Team he copied what the group calls its "target list," people they want to "dox" — to publish their private information, their addresses and phone numbers, to surveil them for possible vandalism. After his testimony, they placed Brodd at the top of the list and within an hour of the attack on his former house, Marb is back on Wickr at 3:48 a.m. telling the group, "Hey y'all, late notice, but some comrades took action at a house owned by Barry Brodd and if someone could swing by in the morning and get pictures, our comrades would be very grateful!"

The target list also includes the head of the deputy sheriffs' union — or "killer deputies," as Antifa calls them — as well as officers involved in fatal confrontations and Trump supporters like Sandy Metzger, the station said. Metzger, who heads the Santa Rosa Republican Women Federated, told KGO that she "really came out strongly against Antifa and [Black Lives Matter]."

When the station told her that she's on the target list, Metzger said it does concern her "a little bit, but that's not going to stop me from speaking out. Somebody has to speak out. And I feel very strong about some of these things." The recordings show the group has already checked out Metzger's house, KGO reported.

The infiltrator told the station he's been in touch with the sheriff's department and Santa Rosa police about the potential threats.

KGO's Dan Noyes said Marb refused his attempts for an interview with him, but the infiltrator actually intercepted a message from the group leader about "Dan Noyes at ABC7 asking about SRA. ...To firmly restate our position, nobody, myself included, should cooperate with press or cops."

The infiltrator added to the station that his interactions with SoCo Radical Action began last year — and he wanted to do something about the group.

"It felt like seeing Antifa getting sort of a pass all the time from government," he told KGO, "saying they don't exist, saying that they're a myth, saying that they're just an idea. You know, when obviously, they are very real, and they're a big threat."

The station reported that since it has been working on the story, Marb has been taking down his social media, both the public and private accounts.

Antifa militants arrested, charged for physically attacking Trump supporters — and they're accused of organizing into groups to carry out crimes


San Diego prosecutors on Dec. 6, 2021, charged multiple Antifa militants with conspiracy to commit a riot, saying they physically attacked supporters of former President Donald Trump the previous January, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

The kicker? A criminal complaint said the arrestees "are self-identified to be affiliated with Anti-fascists or Antifa" and began organizing themselves into San Diego- and Los Angeles-based groups a week before a pro-Trump "Patriot March" on Jan. 9, the paper said. Pretty nifty trick for "an idea, not an organization" and a "myth."

The office of District Attorney Summer Stephan, citing video evidence, said "overwhelmingly the violence in this incident was perpetrated by the Antifa affiliates and was not a mutual fray with both sides crossing out of lawful First Amendment expression into riot and violence,” the Union-Tribune said.

Videographer Sean Carmitchel recorded Antifa attacking people with pepper spray, sticks, a wooden folding chair, punches, and kicks — assaults prosecutors described in the complaint, the paper said, adding that several attacks noted in the complaint appear to match incidents recorded and shared online, such as an Antifa militant pepper-spraying a dog and its owner.

Those arraigned in San Diego Superior Court were with a group arrested in raids by police officers and sheriff’s deputies across Southern California, the Union-Tribune reported.

You can view a video report here about the Antifa violence in San Diego.

A follow-up Blaze News story in July reported that a San Diego judge threw the book at eight violent Antifa militants in connection with the January 2021 incident, bringing the total sentenced to 12.

You can view a video report here about the sentences.

Antifa rioters caught on video fighting Chicago police outside Israeli consulate


— (@)

Blaze Media national correspondent Julio Rosas covered firsthand Antifa militants fighting Chicago police outside the consulate of Israel on Aug. 20 amid protests against the Biden-Harris administration's handling of the Israel-Hamas war. There were calls on social media to "make it great like '68," a reference to the riots during the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago.

Protesters wearing masks and all-black clothing raged not only against Democrats but also against the March on the DNC, the main organizer for protests this week — for being too peaceful. They argued that peaceful marches with help from the police betray the movement to "free Palestine."

After rallying outside the Israeli consulate, the crowd of around 300 started to march straight into a police line, after which a large fight broke out as police pushed and shoved the Antifa marchers back. At least one Antifa member was smacked in the mouth by a police baton. Multiple arrests were made as police grabbed marchers who refused to leave the area.

The protesters who were not initially arrested after the clash gathered themselves into a formation and held a standoff in the street with police, who had now vastly outnumbered the smaller crowd. On the other side of the police line, a few pro-Israel protesters rallied but left at the request of police for their safety.

Eventually, the Black Bloc marchers started walking around downtown, with police following them to ensure they stayed on the sidewalk. The protesters made it onto a street and refused to disperse. Police then declared the remaining crowd to be an unlawful assembly and moved in to arrest the remaining marchers who did not leave after the declaration was made.

Antifa radical arrested for allegedly setting off nail bomb outside Alabama attorney general's office


A radical leftist was arrested April 10 in connection with a February bombing outside the office of Steve Marshall, Alabama's attorney general — a Republican — in Montgomery. Kyle Benjamin Douglas Calvert, 26, of Irondale was indicted on two felony counts of malicious use of an explosive and possession of an unregistered destructive device.

Calvert, an anti-Israel "pansexual" and self-described engineer, apparently reckons himself part of the left-wing extremist group Antifa, which former President Donald Trump suggested in 2020 should be designated a domestic terrorist organization. Weeks ahead of the incident, Calvert showcased the same Antifa propaganda that was later found near the bomb site along with pro-abortion and LGBT agitprop.

The nail bomb was detonated around 3:42 a.m. Feb. 24. Marshall revealed in a statement that "thankfully, no staff or personnel were injured by the explosion." Court documents alleged that Calvert was spotted making his way to the AG's office at 3:35 a.m. There was an explosion several minutes later.

Prosecutors indicated that one of the stickers Calvert allegedly posted near the bomb site read, "SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL ANTIFA." In a Jan. 10 video he originally shared to his TikTok page, referred to in his charging document, Calvert shows off stickers "of identical design to the stickers placed by the subject in and around the Alabama Statehouse and downtown Montgomery," along with stickers that read, "Smash the patriarchy," "Anti-fascism is community defense," and "Queer liberation, not rainbow capitalism."

Prosecutors emphasized that "Calvert is violent, and he is dangerous, just as he said. If Calvert is released, the danger to the community from a second offense is greatly increased." The DOJ noted that if convicted, Calvert faces a mandatory minimum of five years in prison and a maximum penalty of 20 years behind bars.

Five Antifa extremists charged with domestic terrorism


Five Antifa extremists were arrested and charged with domestic terrorism in December 2022 after Georgia law enforcement finally responded to their violent months-long campaign aimed at halting the construction of a new police training center in Dekalb County's South River Forest.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation announced that a task force composed of GBI agents, Atlanta police, the FBI, the DeKalb County Police Department, and other agencies executed a successful operation on Dec. 13 to remove leftist barricades from the entrances to Atlanta's new $90 million police training center and to clear the area of criminal activity.

The operation was prompted by "ongoing criminal activity at the site location," including "carjacking, various crimes against persons, destruction of property, arson, and attacks against public safety officials," wrote GBI spokesman Nelly Miles.

Leftist attacks and threats in the area have become a common occurrence in recent months.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported in October that the extremists — keen on halting construction of what they called "Cop City" on city property — hurled Molotov cocktails at police. The leftist extremists reportedly also threatened contractors, destroyed equipment, and vandalized offices. Richard Porter claimed that when he stopped briefly in the area, he was set upon by people apparently living in the woods and wearing "camouflaged stuff." The extremists allegedly threw a "gas bomb" at Porter and then torched his truck.

WXIA reported that firefighters on Dec. 10 were dispatched to the area to put out a fire apparently set by the leftists. However, when they attempted to extinguish the flames, they were struck by rocks and firecrackers.

While leftist extremists reportedly pelted police and first responders alike with rocks and bottles on Dec. 13, police appear to have answered back with pepper balls.

The task force that addressed the extremist threat arrested 22-year-old Francis Carroll of Maine, 25-year-old Nicholas Olson of Nebraska, 25-year-old Serena Hertel of California, 20-year-old Leonardo Vioselle of Georgia, and 22-year-old Arieon Robinson of Wisconsin, each of whom have been charged with domestic terrorism. Vioselle was the only local among the five. The leftist extremists, held in jail without a bond, were also hit with various other charges, including criminal trespass, aggravated assault, obstruction, and interference with government property. The GBI indicated that police found "explosive devices, gasoline, and road flares" in their search of the "area of concern."

Antifa poet convicted of stabbing Proud Boy members at New York state Capitol during January 6 protest


A journalist poet tied to Antifa on Oct. 7, 2022, was convicted of stabbing Proud Boy members at a Jan. 6, 2021, protest at the New York state Capitol. Alexander Contompasis was convicted by an Albany jury of first-degree assault and other charges.

While the rioting at the U.S. Capitol unfolded, surveillance video captured a fight between Trump supporters and Antifa supporters broke at the New York state Capitol protest. The Times Union obtained video of the attack, which showed two stabbings. A person was seen on the video swinging wildly at Trump supporters before police swept in to break up the fight. The attacker walked off as the video ends.

Multiple arrests were made in relation to the incident, and one of the victims suffered an eviscerated bowel. Police said they found a knife in Contompasis' car that they believed was used in the assault.

One of the stabbing victims said an Antifa member said to him after he was stabbed, "I'm coming for you. I know who you are. I know where you live." The suspect's attorney argued in his defense that he was just defending himself from an "unprovoked" Proud Boys attack. You can view video of the knife attack here.

Police later identified the suspect as Contompasis and charged him with the attack. Prosecutors noted that the man had published posts on social media supportive of the Antifa political group. He also identified himself as an independent journalist and a poet. He claimed that he was not a member of Antifa.

In addition to the first-degree assault charge, Contompasis was convicted of first-degree attempted assault, second-degree assault, and felony possession of a weapon. Prison records indicate the earliest date Contompasis could be released is Nov. 21, 2039.

Antifa front and center amid 'Night of Rage' across America after US Supreme Court overturns Roe V. Wade


Protests erupted across America after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, culminating in a Night of Rage in major cities on June 24, 2022 — and Antifa was front and center.

Antifa-linked pro-abortion group Jane's Revenge vowed to undertake the "night of rage," and black-bloc protesters wielding umbrellas marched through the streets of Washington, D.C. The group chanted slogans such as, "If abortion ain’t safe, neither are you," "If we don’t get it, burn it down," "Every city, every town, burn the precinct to the ground," and "F*** the church, f*** the state, we won't let them decide our fate." The protesters burned American flags. You can view related videos here, here, here, and here.

Commenting on a video recorded in Los Angeles, journalist Andy Ngo wrote that "a rioter at the #Antifa pro-abortion riot" used a "homemade flamethrower to try to burn police. Antifa also throw an explosive mortar firework right at @LAPDHQ officers. A suspect who tried to escape was arrested."

In Seattle, Antifa attacked and pepper-sprayed a pro-life woman, according to Post Millennial reporter Katie Daviscourt. In addition, journalist Jonathan Choe posted video and wrote the following: "I was trying to record Antifa trying to break windows. Then the mutual aid far-left activists spotted me and pointed me out. This black bloc group may be [the] most emboldened crew ever. Knocked my phone down, but I picked up right away. Had to out run them. I’m OK."

Antifa reportedly assaulted videographer Mason Lake while he was covering Night of Rage protests in Portland, Oregon.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Pro-Israel demonstrator arrested after allegedly shooting unhinged male who sprinted across street and tackled him



A pro-Israel demonstrator allegedly shot a male who sprinted across a street and tackled him during what was otherwise called a peaceful pro-Israel rally Thursday evening in Newton, Massachusetts — yet police arrested and charged the pro-Israel demonstrator who was physically attacked.

Cellphone video shows the male yelling at pro-Israel demonstrators from across the street, telling them, "You are sick! You're defending genocide!" A woman apparently with the pro-Israel demonstrators can be heard off camera yelling back, "You are so stupid!" After a cut in the clip, the angry bearded male — who appeared to have a COVID mask under his chin and was wearing a purple T-shirt, black shorts, and reportedly a Palestinian pin — sprints across the street, leaps at, and tackles a pro-Israel protester.

Another witness, Dave Sherman, told WCVB that the male who sprinted across the street and tackled the anti-Israel protester 'was really tough to take down. He was really determined. He was really hateful.'

Three seconds after their bodies hit the sidewalk, a pop is heard — presumably the gunshot.

Two other men are seen on the clip standing above the attacker and pressing their feet on his face, after which the pro-Israel protester, while still sitting on the sidewalk, tells them to get off him and asks where his pistol is. A separate video appears to show that same pro-Israel demonstrator saying to "call 911," telling someone who's yelling at the attacker, "Stop! Go away!" — and then rendering aid to the wounded male.

Investigators identified the pro-Israel demonstrator in question as 47-year-old Scott Hayes of Framingham, WBTS-TV reported.

Middlesex County District Attorney Marian Ryan said at a Thursday news conference that Hayes was arrested and charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and violation of a constitutional right causing injury, WCVB-TV reported. Hayes is to be arraigned Friday at the Newton District Court, Ryan said.

- YouTube youtu.be

The unidentified male who was shot was taken to a hospital with life-threatening injuries, WBTS reported.

Ryan said authorities believe Hayes legally possessed the firearm, WCVB reported.

Hayes reportedly is an Iraq War veteran who is not Jewish but often attends protests carrying American and Israeli flags.

Shaul Brechman, a witness, told WBTS that "it's just one more proof of the problematic way of those [who harbor] anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli way[s] of action."

Another witness, Dave Sherman, told WCVB that the male who sprinted across the street and tackled the anti-Israel protester "was really tough to take down. He was really determined. He was really hateful."

Observers on X were incredulous. One user said, "Ironically this is a perfect metaphor for Israel vs Palestine" before adding a typical sequence of events: "Palestine attacks; Israel shoots in self defense; everyone blames Israel."

Kassy Akiva of the Daily Wire called the Boston Globe "complete trash" for leading its story about the incident with the following sentence, "A small pro Israel rally along Washington Street Thursday evening turned violent when a passerby confronted the demonstrators and during a tussle with one of the men was shot, authorities said." Akiva added, "The truth: The man charged across a street through traffic and tackled a man to the ground. Then the attacker was shot."

Another X user said, "Scott started carrying his flags after we met at Harvard. He’s always been peaceful and respectful. Self-defense is his right. I’m going to support him all the way with this."

Others also were squarely behind Hayes:

  • "Justified," one X user wrote. "Let’s make sure this hero has the proper representation when he’s charged by a leftist DA."
  • "Self defense," another commenter declared. "Zero Sympathy for the man who attacked him."
  • "Don’t attack people and maybe you don’t get shot," another user said.

A GoFundMe for Hayes' legal defense has raised over $64,000 as of Friday morning.

Newton police said they would ramp up patrols at houses of worship this weekend, WBTS said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Reversal of FATE: Steve Baker’s update on January 6 prisoners is ‘a good sign’



January 6 started as a chance for Trump supporters to innocently protest and quickly turned into a day that would change their lives forever.

Now, however, things might be taking a turn for the better.

“One J-sixer is seeing a reversal of fate,” Jill Savage of “Blaze New Tonight” explains.

“John Strand is actually one of the more, let’s call it, infamous stories, certainly one of the more high-profile cases of all the January 6 defendants,” Steve Baker tells Savage.

Strand was friend and bodyguard of Simone Gold — a doctor and attorney who was the deplatformed founder of the Frontline American Doctors. Gold had been accused of “disinformation” for recommending alternative therapies that were not part of what Baker calls the “approved narrative” regarding COVID-19.

Gold was scheduled to speak on January 6 at one of the six legally permitted events scheduled on the Capitol property that day.

“By the time they got to the Capitol, everything had gone to hell in a handbasket, and so there was nothing but chaos by the time they arrived. The breaches had already taken place. John Strand and Simone Gold did not participate in violence, they did not participate in breaching the Capitol building whatsoever,” Baker explains.

However, their fatal flaw was going inside the Capitol peacefully.

“She actually decided to deliver her prepared remarks there in the Rotunda. She climbed up on the Eisenhower statue, with John standing guard beside her, she delivered her remarks there in the great Rotunda of the Capitol, and then they peacefully left, just as so many other hundreds and thousands of people did,” Baker says.

Both Strand and Gold were “handed that infamous 1512 obstruction of an official proceeding felony.”

The felony carried up to 20 years of imprisonment.

Gold ended up taking a plea deal and pled down to a single misdemeanor. Judge Christopher Cooper sentenced her to 60 days in prison.

“John Strand decided he was not going to take this lying down, that he was going to be a warrior, and he, despite the odds being horribly stacked against him, he was going to go to trial and he did that,” Baker explains.

He was convicted on all counts, and he was sentenced to 32 months in prison.

“Now what’s happening is that because of the Supreme Court’s overturning the 1512 obstruction of an official proceeding charge against 355 defendants, him being one of those,” Baker says, “they’re shortening their sentences or letting them go.”

If they haven’t gone to trial yet, they’re not charging them with it.

“It’s especially a good sign because the Department of Justice has already announced that they want to figure out how to continue with that charge,” Baker explains. “But the point being, is it appears that the judges are pushing back against the DOJ.”

“We’ll take this as a good sign,” he adds.


Connecticut Prosecutors Arrest 4 Democrats For Allegedly Misusing Absentee Ballots

Connecticut prosecutors charged four Democrat operatives for allegedly misusing absentee ballots during a 2019 Democrat mayoral primary.

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



The federal government denied Blaze News investigative journalist Steve Baker's pretrial request to lift a gun possession restriction on him over Baker's "alleged threatening statements" at "public officials" on January 6.

Washington, D.C., federal Judge Christopher R. Cooper's minute order said Baker's Pretrial Services officers cited "safety concerns" in regard to Baker possessing a gun — and Cooper added that such concerns are "heightened" due to Baker's "alleged threatening statements directed at specific public officials during the riot on January 6, 2021," which Baker covered that day as an independent journalist.

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

Cooper also denied Baker's motion to lift a requirement that he notify Pretrial Services before entering Washington, D.C., "given the gravity of his purported misconduct inside the Capitol on January 6, which was allegedly targeted at high-ranking federal lawmakers."

What's the background?

Baker last month pleaded not guilty to four non-violent misdemeanor charges the Justice Department brought against him in connection with his reporting at the U.S. Capitol on January 6. Baker has been searching for the truth about what went on behind the scenes that day and believes the U.S. government has been targeting him for it.

After being told he was being charged, Baker arrived at the FBI's 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 conduct in a restricted building or grounds
  • Disorderly conduct in a capitol building
  • Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a capitol building

Baker and others have blasted the charges against him. U.S. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) himself sounded off with a March op-ed asking, "Where is the outrage over Steve Baker’s prosecution?"

What's more, shortly after Baker's arrest, Blaze Media released never-before-seen video showing Baker's movements in and around the U.S. Capitol on January 6, which appears to stand in stark contrast to the narrative the federal government has been floating about him.

The 47-minute video includes Baker's cellphone camera documentation of what went on inside the Capitol building alongside newly released footage from the Capitol's CCTV cameras that BlazeTV obtained primarily through Loudermilk's efforts. He and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) have made providing access to January 6 videos a priority.

Here's the unfiltered video showing 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 6 youtu.be

Baker discussed his legal saga in a pair of October commentary pieces for Blaze News (here and here), detailing the ins and outs of the federal investigation he's been under following his independent journalistic work on January 6, which took place prior to him joining Blaze News.

Restrictions

Baker told Blaze News that during his first appearance before Cooper in a virtual hearing last month there was "quite a bit of discussion" about pretrial restrictions on him, which related to Cooper's previous order to Baker to comply with them. Baker, in turn, maintained he's been in compliance all along.

Still, Baker seemed upbeat in April and confident that things would be resolved, telling Blaze News that "the government is working with my attorneys to modify the language of certain restrictions."

Baker told Blaze News that until recently he had carried a gun for self-defense due to online threats he's received — concerns that played out in a couple of unnerving encounters during which Baker said individuals actually came looking for him in person.

But in his minute order issued Tuesday, Cooper noted that "concerning the firearm restriction, Pretrial Services has informed the Court that it objects to this late-breaking request, citing safety concerns, and the Court finds that the restriction is necessary to ensure the safety of Pretrial Services officers who may need to conduct a home visit or visit the defendant without warning." Cooper added that "these safety concerns are heightened because of Mr. Baker's alleged threatening statements directed at specific public officials during the riot on January 6, 2021."

Problem is, Baker told Blaze News that until recently, he had carried a gun for self-defense due to online threats he's received — concerns that played out in a couple of unnerving encounters during which Baker said individuals actually came looking for him in person.

Cooper did grant Baker's request to modify a requirement that he "report every contact with law enforcement. Henceforth, Mr. Baker is required to report only instances where he engages with law-enforcement personnel in their official capacity because of his own suspected wrongdoing (i.e., if he is suspected of, charged with, or cited for any violation of law)."

'Made my blood boil'

Baker broke down with Blaze News his disagreement with this week's ruling: "This is the second of these minute orders from Judge Cooper, and both have made my blood boil. My attorneys advise me to prepare for many more days like this. In both cases, these minute orders seem to be coming on the advice of a D.C.-based pretrial services officer whom I’ve never met. My North Carolina PSO is great, and he has even told me he doesn’t consider me a risk at all. So the D.C. PSO just seems to be advising the court by rote."

In regard to Cooper stating Baker made "alleged threatening statements directed at specific public officials during the riot on January 6, 2021," Baker told Blaze News he "made no threatening statements at all on January 6. Much less directed at 'specific public officials.' It’s almost as if Judge Cooper hasn’t yet taken the time to become familiar with the basics of my case. I’d already gotten that impression during my last status hearing when Cooper was surprised to learn that I’m a working journalist with Blaze News."

Baker also told Blaze News he takes issue with Cooper denying his motion to lift a requirement that he notify Pretrial Services before entering Washington, D.C., "given the gravity of his purported misconduct inside the Capitol on January 6, which was allegedly targeted at high-ranking federal lawmakers."

Here's how Baker answered that assertion:

First, there was no misconduct while at the Capitol. None. Second, my jokingly calling Nancy Pelosi a "bitch" happened on video while sharing adult beverages at a hotel in Virginia, AFTER I’d left the Capitol. Is this a new legal precedent with which I’m not familiar, that using non-threatening pejoratives when referring to 'high-ranking' lawmakers over drinks is grounds for restricting travel to D.C.? If so, the court should never allow any non-residents to visit our nation’s capital.

The bottom line is that Judge Cooper has taken this very unusual tack of issuing a minute order while also failing to address any of my attorneys arguments in the motion. Instead, he just parroted whatever some anonymous pretrial services officer said in response to my motion.

And Cooper makes no mention of the fact that Assistant U.S. Attorney Anita Eve in the government’s response to my motion had the audacity to say, "Travel to the District of Columbia is not a 'right.''' My attorney William Shipley — a former federal prosecutor for over 20 years — highlighted the absurdity of the government’s response on X: "This opposition is some of the weakest legal work I've seen come out of DOJ over the past 30+ months."

Because Cooper chose to completely ignore the arguments in my motion, we are going to file an expedited appeal.

Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson also blasted Tuesday's ruling:

What the government is doing to Steve is political lawfare. We put the footage of Steve in the Capitol on January 6 on YouTube. What he said and did there is a matter of public record. The government is telling Steve he cannot exercise his Second Amendment rights and protect himself because of words he said that day. What words? Who was threatened? And if the punishment for calling Nancy Pelosi a bitch while sitting with your friends is a 'threat' requiring firearm restrictions, well, there are millions of us that they need to start processing.

A Blaze News exclusive story from March detailed what the federal government specifically accused Baker of saying and doing on January 6 — all contrasted with video evidence that appeared to call the government's conclusions into question.

What has Baker uncovered so far?

Baker began his investigative reporting for Blaze News last fall. His first January 6 analysis for Blaze News came last October following countless hours in a House subcommittee office looking at frame after frame of January 6 closed-circuit video — and it had him wondering: Did Capitol Police Special Agent David Lazarus perjure himself in the Oath Keepers trial?

Baker's investigative efforts also resulted in two additional analyses, both focusing on Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn: "January 6 and the N-word that wasn't" and "Harry Dunn's account of January 6 does not add up. At all."

In December, Baker alleged that he uncovered major irregularities involving Dunn, the Capitol Police, the press, and U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland).

In January, Baker asserted that newly released U.S. Capitol closed-circuit TV video clips from January 6 show Lazarus gave false testimony in the Oath Keepers trial.

Proof of Perjury | The Truth About January 6 youtu.be

Also in January, Baker and others were asking what the U.S. government has to hide in regard to the pipe bomb found on January 6 at the Democratic National Committee headquarters.

Baker in February wrote another analysis titled "Capitol Police diverted all CCTV cameras away from DNC pipe bomb investigation — except one" and later that month asked why Kamala Harris was at the DNC and not the Capitol on January 6.

Rep. Loudermilk — who chairs the Committee on House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight — in March told Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck the reason the FBI and the Justice Department may be going after Baker over his January 6 coverage is because "he's onto something" the federal government wants kept under wraps.

In addition, GOP House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan in March opened an investigation into the DOJ over its treatment of Baker. In a scathing letter to Matthew Graves, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Jordan outlined "serious concerns" about the DOJ's "selective prosecution" concerning Baker's arrest "as well as the Department's commitments to the First Amendment rights of journalists."

In his letter, Jordan demanded that Graves produce the following no later than 5 p.m. March 26:

  • All documents and communications regarding Baker's arrest;
  • All documents and communications regarding any investigation, prosecution, and arrest of any other journalist covering Jan. 6;
  • All documents and communications related to the DOJ's determination to request pretrial detention of defendants charged in connection with Jan. 6 — plus those who are now or who have been in pretrial detention related to Jan. 6.

Jordan's letter concludes by reminding Graves that the Judiciary Committee has "jurisdiction to oversee" the DOJ regarding matters "related to civil liberties."

Baker has told Blaze News that according to his contacts on the Judiciary Committee, Jordan's demands have yet to be met.

Baker in April penned another analysis titled "Overreaching prosecution tactics face high court scrutiny in Jan. 6 cases," in which he warned that "the Justice Department could easily use a law aimed at destruction of evidence to quash disfavored political views."

Journalist Steve Baker shares TRUTH of Recent High-Profile J6 Arrest youtu.be

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze Media releases never-before-seen video of Steve Baker in US Capitol on Jan. 6; Baker, others blast charges against him



In the wake of the arrest Friday of Blaze News investigative journalist Steve Baker in connection with his reporting on Jan. 6, 2021, Blaze Media on Wednesday released never-before-seen video showing Baker's movements in and around the U.S. Capitol that day, which appears to stand in stark contrast to the narrative the federal government is floating about him.

The 47-minute video includes Baker's cellphone camera documentation of what went on inside the Capitol building alongside newly released footage from the Capitol's CCTV cameras that BlazeTV obtained primarily through the efforts of Republican U.S. Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia. Loudermilk and Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson (La.) have made providing access to Jan. 6 videos a priority.

Here's the unfiltered video showing Baker on Jan. 6 just before he entered the Capitol, his movements inside the building, and after he left it. Content warning: Language:

Steve Baker Inside the Capitol on January 6 youtu.be

With this new video as a backdrop, Baker and others are blasting his federal misdemeanor charges stemming from his independent journalistic activities on Jan. 6, before he joined Blaze News, as well as the related "statement of facts" from the FBI.

The four nonviolent charges against Baker are: knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority; disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds; disorderly conduct in a capitol building; and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a capitol building.

Image source: Blaze News

Baker told Blaze News in blistering fashion Tuesday night that the federal government needs "to establish a narrative needed to justify the charges," and in the end that essentially amounts to "damn freedom of speech, thought, opinion, and expression."

Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson — on the heels of the release of the video of Baker in and around the Capitol — asked in a Wednesday op-ed, "Is journalism still legal in America?"

"He is most certainly guilty of committing journalism, an act that until last week was protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution," Peterson wrote. "In short, Steve Baker did not riot. He reported. He exercised his First Amendment rights."

What's more, the criminal complaint against Baker and statement of facts are dated Feb. 21. Strangely, both documents were withheld from Baker and his legal team until after he turned himself in to the FBI in Dallas on Friday. Why? Apparently because the powers that be were concerned Baker would reveal the charges against him on social media.

What does the FBI's 'statement of facts' say?

Among the main points found in the FBI's 13-page statement of facts is a section highlighting Baker's commentary in a post-Jan. 6 video in which he notes being inside then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office.

Was he violent or destructive? As usual, no. Instead the FBI calls out Baker's speech as he recollects the moment: "The only thing I regret is that I didn't like steal their computers because God knows what I could've found on their computers if I'd done that. But by the time I got into Pelosi's office, unfortunately there was some damage done."

Believe it or not, the FBI adds that Baker "expressed approval of the vandalization he claimed to have witnessed in Pelosi’s office" and quotes him as saying, "They got Pelosi's office, and you know, it couldn't happen to a better deserving bitch."

The FBI also says Baker recorded himself saying, “Look out your windows, bitches, look what’s coming" as he approached the Capitol just after 1 p.m. Again, more speech crime. The agency also says Baker "ignored instructions to move off" steps, according to body-worn camera footage.

The FBI notes that Baker "entered the United States Capitol through the broken Senate Wing Door" at approximately 2:19 p.m.

Notice Baker not engaging in a high five with a waiting protester at the entrance — Baker is inside the red circle in the image below holding aloft his cellphone camera. Instead he continues to document what was going down:

Image source: YouTube screenshot

The FBI also claims that at one point "officers attempted to keep Baker on the other side of a door jamb, but instead of heeding their instructions Baker antagonized them. Baker repeatedly asked, 'Are you going to use that [gun] on us?!' Baker eventually moved past these officers and took stairs down to the first floor. The remaining members of this crowd are pushed back down toward the House Chamber entrance."

Baker's response to Blaze News regarding the aforementioned FBI claim? "The only time I said a word inside the Capitol was when all the police officers near the House chamber suddenly drew their weapons. None of us near me knew that someone had just been shot. I hadn’t seen drawn weapons all day, then suddenly nearly every cop had them drawn and at high-ready," he said. "I simply wanted to know if we were about to get shot. ... Asking a question about your own potential life-or-death jeopardy is hardly abusive language."

The FBI also says Baker "moved toward the Hall of Columns where he was then led out of the Capitol by an officer with the United States Capitol Police." The agency said in its statement of facts that Baker left the building at approximately 2:56 p.m. and that he was "inside the building for approximately 37 minutes."

The FBI then cites an interview between Baker and WUSA-TV in which he stated, “Yeah I was quite excited to see this going on,” and, “Do I approve of what happened today? I approve 100%.” Again, more wrong-speech.

How else did Baker respond?

Baker had a lot more to say to Blaze News in regard to the criminal complaint against him and the FBI's statement of facts.

"As to the charge of 'entering a restricted space,' I, along with approximately 60 other journalists of all types, did exactly that," Baker said. "The other three charges are just typical Department of Justice theater of the absurd. It is the MO of the DOJ — not just in January 6 cases — to significantly overcharge the accused in order to frighten them into a quick plea deal. In the case of the low-level J6 defendants, they all get these same four misdemeanors, whether they opened their mouths or not, and whether or not they ‘paraded and picketed' — which has a very specific meaning."

Baker added to Blaze News: "I used no loud or abusive language, and I certainly didn’t picket or parade. I had no flags or signs and wore no MAGA paraphernalia or any political messaging."

More from Baker's response to Blaze News:

As to the contents of the Statement of Facts, that is the FBI/DOJ’s attempt to establish a narrative needed to justify the charges. And when they don’t have evidence of the actions, deeds, or crimes they are accusing someone of, they look for speech and words by which they can establish "state of mind" or "intent." In my case, they had to use statements made before I arrived at the Capitol and after I left. All are made outside of the so-called restricted area. All are presented out of context. Ignoring the fact that once on the property and documenting the developing story, my personal opinions — indeed all thoughts about what I witnessed and experienced — were kept to myself while professionally doing my job while following that story where the story went. (As shown in our video presentation.) But for J6 defendants ... damn freedom of speech, thought, opinion, and expression. Like so many of these J6 cases, it is those "thought crimes" the DOJ puts in front of the prejudicial juries — no matter the basic tenet of classical liberalism, which should be the golden rule of our judiciary: "No victim, no crime."

How did Baker's attorney respond?

Baker's attorney William L. Shipley — who penned a Monday op-ed telling federal prosecutors "game on" — offered Blaze News the following response to the criminal complaint against Baker and the FBI's statement of facts.

"As I have seen in many other January 6 cases, the government has presented still images from longer videos and segments from longer written or audio recording of events that either lack context or are simply taken out of context. I know what some of the longer versions of this evidence actually shows, and those longer versions undermine the one-sided conclusions drawn by the special agent in the Affidavit. And that is all this document represents — the opinions of a single FBI agent who signed it," Shipley stated Wednesday.

He added, "In 32 years doing federal criminal trial work as both a prosecutor and a defense attorney, I've seen these kinds of conclusions turn out to be incorrect many many times. I expect that will be the outcome here."

'The statement of facts is so weak'

Kyle Seraphin — a former FBI special agent and U.S. Air Force veteran — wrote about Baker's arrest in a Monday op-ed, saying that it "disgraces the FBI." But Seraphin on Wednesday also offered Blaze News additional perspective regarding the government's criminal complaint and statement of facts.

"Like every individual arrested for January 6/Capitol riot-related charges, Steve Baker was arrested on a criminal complaint. Using a complaint is a dramatic departure from any normal process for the FBI. Complaints are used for exigent circumstances, and as such, the FBI will rarely if ever file a criminal complaint to bring a subject into custody. Because the FBI engages in long-term investigations, like the Capitol riot case, there is more than enough time for them to take their case to a grand jury and receive an indictment. This means that the process involves citizens who are outside of the justice system to evaluate if there is 'probable cause to believe' the individual was involved in a federal crime. The complaint only involves a federal magistrate judge and the affiant — in this case — an FBI agent," Seraphin wrote.

He added, "Steve's complaint is like all of the complaints I have seen — it starts with a significant 'background' section which covers events of the day that have nothing to do with any 'allegation or information' regarding a federal crime Steve Baker is alleged to have committed. In Steve's case, there is also a significant amount of color commentary about his First Amendment-protected speech that did not happen during a time when he is alleged to have committed a crime."

Seraphin also stated that "the statement of facts is so weak, Agent Noyes and the magistrate judge who signed this complaint should be embarrassed they participated in this punishment theater of a journalist. The document itself is a microcosm of just how far the FBI has fallen from the once most respected law enforcement agency in America. They are now doing political hit jobs on perceived opponents of the Biden administration."

Jonathan Turley — the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School — penned an op-ed for The Hill the day after Baker's arrest calling out the charges and the content of the FBI's statement of facts against Baker.

"The Justice Department leaves little doubt why they pursued Baker. The criminal complaint and an FBI agent’s affidavit repeatedly reference Baker’s support for those who stormed the Capitol," Turley wrote. "Entering through a broken door like hundreds of others, he walked past Capitol police, who stood by and even directed some protesters. Baker was in the building for only approximately 37 minutes before police led him out."

What's the background?

Baker told Blaze News the FBI instructed him to self-surrender on Friday morning, and Baker did just that.

While Baker said the agency told him to show up at the Dallas field office in "shorts and sandals" — which he said typically means authorities want to make it easier to prep an individual for a "humiliation" perp-walk routine — Baker, dignified as ever, arrived in a suit and tie.

— (@)

Later he was placed in handcuffs, walked by a pair of agents to a vehicle, and transported to a courthouse.

— (@)

Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson — who accompanied Baker to the FBI field office — posted the following reaction: "Tough to watch. Totally unnecessary. There was no reason to take him into custody and have U.S. marshals transport him to the courthouse. We expect and hope to see him on the other side of this in a few hours."

BlazeTV contributor Jill Savage noted Friday that she exited the courtroom with Baker, who "was able to wear his dress clothes but had shackles on his wrists and ankles. He is expected to be released today. His next hearing is set in DC for March 14th." Soon after, Baker was released.

Glenn Beck, co-founder of Blaze Media, wrote in a Friday morning op-ed that Baker's First Amendment battle is ours, too: "When the United States government can come after individuals, that's when you know our republic is crumbling. I've always said that if they can go after Donald Trump, they will go after people like you and me. And now they are. But Steve Baker is not deterred, and neither are we."

Beck on Thursday asked Baker how he was holding up. Here's how Baker responded:

— (@)

Beck interviewed Baker again after his release, and Baker said of his arrest, "I thought I was ready for it until they put the leg chains on." He added to Beck that he was placed “in a cage with a meth dealer" and had his hearing on the same day as a “felony defendant" who actually wasn't “guarded by U.S. Marshals with leg chains on.”

Baker announced in December that the FBI said the Justice Department would be charging him for his Jan. 6 reporting — but two days later, he noted that the FBI said his self-surrender was postponed until after Christmas.

It was a waiting game ever since.

Attorneys representing Baker in January told Blaze News that the Justice Department might be orchestrating a "retaliation" against Baker over his Jan. 6 reporting.

"Steve’s actions on January 6 have been known to the Department of Justice for 3 years," Baker's attorneys said in a January news release. "But it is only now — after Steve has broken two major stories greatly embarrassing to the DOJ — that he is possibly being targeted for arrest and possibly felony prosecution. Any action taken to put him in handcuffs, hold him in custody, and have him transported to court by federal law enforcement will be nothing other than retaliation for his recent reporting."

Baker discussed his legal saga in a pair of October commentary pieces for Blaze News (here and here), detailing the ins and outs of the federal investigation he's been under following his independent journalistic work on Jan. 6.

What has been uncovered as a result of Baker's investigations?

Baker's first Jan. 6 analysis for Blaze News came last October following countless hours in a House subcommittee office looking at frame after frame of Jan. 6 closed-circuit video — and it had him wondering: Did Capitol Police Special Agent David Lazarus perjure himself in the Oath Keepers trial?

Soon after, the slow pace of getting an unrestricted look at everything recorded on video prompted Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson's appeal to House Speaker Mike Johnson to release all the videos. On Nov. 17, Johnson did just that.

Baker's investigative efforts also resulted in two additional analyses, both focusing on Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn: "January 6 and the N-word that wasn't" and "Harry Dunn's account of January 6 does not add up. At all."

In December, Baker alleged that he uncovered major irregularities involving Dunn, the Capitol Police, the press, and U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland).

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

Proof of Perjury | The Truth About January 6 youtu.be

Also in January, Baker and others were asking what the U.S. government has to hide in regard to the pipe bomb found on Jan. 6 at the Democratic National Committee headquarters. Baker in February wrote another analysis titled "Capitol Police diverted all CCTV cameras away from DNC pipe bomb investigation — except one."

Baker penned his latest analysis on Feb. 21, asking why Kamala Harris was at the DNC and not the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze News' Steve Baker released from courthouse after arrest over his Jan. 6 reporting — and notables have been reacting



Blaze News investigative journalist Steve Baker has been released from a federal courthouse in Dallas after his arrest earlier Friday over his Jan. 6 reporting:

— (@)

Baker also spoke to BlazeTV's Steve Deace after his release:

— (@)

What are the details?

Baker — who for years has been searching for the truth about Jan. 6, 2021, and believes the U.S. government has been targeting him for it — on Friday was charged with four misdemeanors related to his Jan. 6 coverage at the U.S. Capitol after turning himself in to the FBI in Dallas.

But first he was handcuffed and perp-walked:

— (@)

The charges are:

  • Knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority
  • Disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds
  • Disorderly conduct in a capitol building
  • Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a capitol building

BlazeTV contributor Jill Savage noted Friday that she exited the courtroom with Baker, who "was able to wear his dress clothes but had shackles on his wrists and ankles. He is expected to be released today. His next hearing is set in DC for March 14th."

Baker learned of the charges for the first time Friday and earlier this week told Blaze News that the powers that be wouldn't tell his attorney about the charges because they believed Baker would post them on social media.

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."

'This is truly outrageous'

Baker's arrest and charges have been getting a ton of attention — and notable individuals have been weighing in:

— (@)
— (@)
— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze Media investigative journalist Steve Baker says Justice Department will be charging him for his Jan. 6 reporting



Blaze Media investigative journalist Steve Baker on Thursday said the U.S. Department of Justice will be charging him for his Jan. 6 reporting.

— (@)

"My attorney has just been notified by @FBI that I am going to be charged by @TheJusticeDept for my journalistic efforts on #Jan6," Baker wrote Thursday on X. "I have to self-surrender on Tuesday. Charges are yet unknown. Stay tuned for more information to follow this afternoon."

What are the details?

Baker on Thursday told Blaze Media that FBI Special Agent Craig Noyes contacted his attorney in North Carolina and that Noyes said he doesn't know what the charges are — and won't know until the judge signs off on the warrant.

Baker also told Blaze Media that if the Justice Department goes forward with charges, travel restrictions will be placed on him, which will hamper his reporting, as he's based in North Carolina but works a great deal in Washington, D.C., covering trials, viewing Jan. 6 videos, and speaking face-to-face with elected officials.

Given Baker has been writing Blaze Media investigative stories on Jan. 6 since early October, Baker said he "cannot help but think the timing [of the impending charges] is suspect."

Blaze Media's editor in chief, Matthew Peterson, spoke out Thursday regarding the message Baker said the FBI delivered to his attorney.

— (@)
— (@)
— (@)

What's the background?

Baker discussed his Jan. 6 legal saga in a pair of October commentary pieces for Blaze Media (here and here).

In them, Baker said he'd been under federal investigation for the better part of two years following his independent journalistic work on Jan. 6, which began before he joined Blaze Media.

More from Baker's first commentary:

I made no effort to hide what I was doing on January 6. I did two different interviews that same day with WUSA, a CBS News affiliate in Washington, D.C. I also uploaded a short YouTube video commentary later that same evening.

Upon returning to my home in Raleigh, North Carolina, I socked myself away for five days, doing a frame-by-frame analysis of my own videos. I then wrote and published on January 13, 2021, a 9,500-word opus to my blog detailing what I experienced that day, titled, “What I Saw on January 6th in Washington, D.C.

That piece, and a February 24, 2021, follow-up, “Who was ‘Up the Chain’ on January 6?” has been viewed and read by hundreds of thousands of readers on my blog and various social media pages.

I always expected that I would be contacted by the FBI at some point, at the very least to acquire my videos for the bureau's investigations. I did no violence or property destruction on January 6, and I certainly did not interfere with the election certification, as I didn’t enter the Capitol Building until well after both the Senate and House of Representatives had been evacuated.

After the FBI made initial contact with Baker in July 2021, Baker said he and his attorney met in person with FBI Special Agents Gerrit Doss and Craig Noyes in North Carolina on Oct. 18, 2021. At the conclusion of the interview, Baker said he and his attorney volunteered to turn over Baker's Jan. 6 videos, but nothing came of that.

Baker said his attorney got a Nov. 17, 2021, email from assistant U.S. attorney Anita Eve saying that Baker could expect to be "charged within the week" — and that the charges would be interstate racketeering and property damage, which Baker said were bogus. With that, Baker said he and his attorney informed the media that he — an independent journalist — was being prosecuted for his coverage of Jan. 6.

Eve was forwarded a copy of Baker's press release, telling his attorney that she was "not thrilled" with it. His attorney replied, “Mr. Baker is obviously feeling threatened by the charges and is using his First Amendment right to garner support. ... Are you suggesting that he refrain from making further statements? ... He has nothing to hide. But he does have a right to speak truthfully about his experiences and share his opinions. ... It’s not fair to ask him to be silent while he endures federal prosecution.” His attorney again volunteered to turn over Baker's Jan. 6 videos.

Despite the threat of charges "within the week," Baker said he didn't hear from Eve's office for nearly two years — and in August 2023, his attorney accepted service of a grand jury subpoena, signed by Eve, for all the Jan. 6 videos Baker personally recorded.

Baker wrote in his second commentary that "grand juries generally are not convened for misdemeanor offenses but rather for felony charges." Curiously, he added that renewed interest from the Justice Department coincided perfectly with his discussions with Blaze Media to become a contributing investigative journalist and columnist.

As Baker told Blaze Media on Thursday, he'd been "poking the bear rather aggressively."

Later that same August, Baker and his attorney delivered a flash drive containing his videos to FBI Special Agent Noyes.

Baker concluded his second commentary with the following promise: "The truth is, my life hasn’t been destroyed. Yet. But many others have been. I intend to show through my investigations that many lives have been destroyed for no good reason — and that cannot stand."

How are others reacting?

Bradford L. Geyer, an attorney who represented now-imprisoned Oath Keeper Kenneth Harrelson — who Baker said was unjustly accused on Jan. 6 — on Thursday told Blaze Media that "since Jan. 6, few reporters have uncovered as many vital stories as Steve Baker. It sadly seems plausible that the decision to charge him is influenced by his recent reporting and the new stories he's in the process of breaking. If the government believes this will silence him, we predict it will be sadly mistaken. Journalists play a critical role in upholding transparency and informing the public, making it vital for them to operate without undue interference from law enforcement. Providing journalists with protections and a buffer ensures the preservation of a free press, safeguarding the democratic principles of open discourse and accountability. Sadly, it seems that the historical high bar for investigating journalists at the Justice Department has been conspicuously lowered in some cases. Given the stakes, all journalists should rally to Steve Baker’s defense."

Anything else?

Baker's first Jan. 6 analysis came in October, following countless hours in a House subcommittee office looking at frame after frame of Jan. 6 closed-circuit video — and it had him wondering: did the security chief for then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi perjure himself in the Oath Keepers trial?

Soon after, the slow pace of getting an unrestricted look at everything recorded on video prompted Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson's appeal to House Speaker Mike Johnson to release all the videos. On Nov. 17, Johnson did just that.

Baker's investigative efforts also resulted in two additional analyses, both focusing on Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn: "January 6 and the N-word that wasn't" and "Harry Dunn's account of January 6 does not add up. At all."

Just days ago, Baker alleged he uncovered major irregularities involving Dunn, Capitol Police, the press, and U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland).

Here's Baker speaking to Glenn Beck, founder of TheBlaze, on Oct. 4 about his first Jan. 6 investigative story for Blaze Media:

Pelosi’s Head of Security Likely PERJURED Himself With Jan 6 LIE | Blaze Media EXCLUSIVEyoutu.be

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

FACT CHECK: No, All Charges Against Sam Bankman-Fried Have Not Been Dropped

Only a campaign finance charge has been dropped, according to the New York Post