Below is my column in the Hill on a controversial criminal case involving a conservative journalist who was arrested after the January 6th riot. The prosecution of Steven Baker exposes the growing tensions in the media over the role of reporters as advocates.
Here is the column:
Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University journalism professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones declared recently that “all journalism is activism.” Advocacy journalism is all the rage in journalism schools and on major media platforms.
Given that shift in journalism, one would think that these editors and journalists would love Steven Baker.
Baker was arrested for covering what he viewed as a citizen protest defying the government and demanding justice. He did not hide his support for their cause as he reported on what became a riot.
Baker, however, is a conservative journalist and the protest that he was covering became the Jan. 6th riot. Now, the Biden administration has arrested Baker on four misdemeanor charges linked to his entry into the Capitol on that day.
Baker would later not only supply stories to his main media outlet, Blaze News, but also sell videos to The New York Times and HBO.
Journalists often accompany protesters and even mobs as stories unfold. Indeed, there were many reporters in the crowd that entered the Capitol. But Baker, the conservative journalist, was charged while others were not.
The response from most media figures and groups has been crickets.
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. 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.
The government claims that the Texas-based writer “antagonized” police officers when they blocked his effort to get through a door. They quote him as asking “Are you going to use that (gun) on us?”
They also quote him as later stating, in an interview with a local television station, that he was “quite excited to see this going on. Do I approve of what happened today? I approve 100 percent.”
He also pointed out his image in footage while emphasizing that his red hat was not a MAGA hat but a Yorktown, Virginia hat. He would joke about what a shame it was that he did not get his hands on Nancy Pelosi’s computer, given what he might have found.
In any other context, Baker might be the poster boy for the new journalism. “J-schools” now encourage students to leave “neutrality behind” and push “solidarity [as] ‘a commitment to social justice that translates into action.’”
A recent series of interviews with over 75 media leaders by Leonard Downie Jr., former Washington Post executive editor, and Andrew Heyward, former CBS News president, reaffirmed this shift. As Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Chronicle, stated: “Objectivity has got to go.”
But that objectivity seems to depend heavily upon what ideology you are advocating.
For example, NPR employees objected to efforts to maintain a neutral tone in reporting and declared that “civility is a weapon wielded by the powerful.” The NPR leadership went even further to unleash the advocates within journalists, by allowing them to cross over from covering to participating in protests.
The public-subsidized NPR declared that reporters could join political protests when the editors believe the causes advance the “freedom and dignity of human beings.”
Something tells me that NPR editors would not have found Baker’s brand of advocacy to be “dignified.”
NPR recently hired a new CEO, Katherine Maher, who has declared that “white silence is complicity” and has publicly denounced Trump and his supporters. The message seems clear about what kind of protests would be considered advancements of freedom.
Would the government have charged an NPR reporter who accompanied Black Lives Matter rioters in the police station they occupied in Seattle? If not, then what exactly is the dividing line between crime and advocacy journalism? Is it an ideological line?
In the George Floyd riots, at least 126 journalists were arrested or detained in 2020. Virtually all of the charges against them were dropped. Des Moines Register reporter Andrea Sahouri was tried on simple misdemeanors for failure to disperse and interference with official acts. She was acquitted.
The difference is that a long list of journalistic organizations came to her aid. That is not the case for Baker.
Before Baker’s arrest, Washington media was already facing criticisms over double standards. Recently, CBS was embroiled in a controversy after it fired acclaimed investigative journalist Cathrine Herridge, who had clashed with the liberal network over her work on stories unpopular with the Biden White House and many Democratic establishment figures. Not only did they lay Herridge off, but CBS brass even seized her files and forced her union to take legal action before giving them back. The files contained confidential source information.
While this was unfolding, Herridge was in court, fighting to protect her confidential sources. After CBS fired her, she was held in contempt this week for refusing to violate journalistic confidentiality. The same week, despite firing Herridge and seizing her files, CBS President Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews was honored at the 33rd annual First Amendment Awards.
Likewise, this week, Julian Assange is facing deportation and prosecution for publishing the Wikileaks files, exposing abuses in the U.S. government. Although legacy media routinely publish classified material from whistleblowers, Assange has embarrassed many in Washington and will have to pay for it.
That brings us back to Baker. He is not charged with property damage or violence. The question is whether, on that day, he was an advocate, a journalist or an advocate journalist.
So, what exactly is journalism? Major media figures have actively erased the distinction between advocates and journalists. It is now subject to the same test that Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once used to identify pornography in the case Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964): “I shall not today attempt further to define [it]…But I know it when I see it.”
Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.
Political correctness has taken US journalism hostage. Toe the PC narrative, or face cancellation, doxxing, deplatforming, defunding, firing, and now, prosecution by the commissars of the PC cultural marxist class, the leftist cultural bourgeoisie, latter day Jacobins wielding their virtual guillotinewith wild abandon.
Neither Baker nor Assange are favored by our government’s “Just Us” system. There’s your answer.
https://cis.org/Bensman/Government-Admission-Biden-Parole-Flights-Create-Security-Vulnerabilities-US-Airports
320,000 illegals flown in on jets by the biden admin from foreign nations with a phone app
demoncrats, full blown criminals
The FBI’s pattern Democrat Different Democracy since Obama’s first day in office continues. In this case, charge journalists they see as adversarial to their fraud shop, while at the same time giving a pass to journalists they partnered with, helping them do what they see as God’s Work: get Trump.
Not one of the journalists who bribed over 30 FBI agents working on “the Trump Russia Dossier” has ever been arrested, much less charged. Nor have any of the FBI agents who accepted those bribes been charged. It was mentioned in findings numerous times – but predictably the news organizations involved never made mention of it.
The Inspector General’s investigation of what the FBI did to Trump in the 2016 election (while at the same time dropping four criminal investigations of Clinton) found that 30 FBI agents involved in some capacity in the Trump “investigation” accepted gratuities from the NYT, WaPoo, CNN, etc. The IG also used “lacked candor” for the perjured testimony of McCabe and Strzok, when plain language would be to say he lied. Similarly, using the word “gratuities” is substituting for the act of taking a bribe.
One place to start with cleaning up criminality in journalism would be indicting every single one of those journalists who coordinated and partnered with those FBI agents to push the “Russia Dossier leaks”.
We are well down the road to an enormously over-expansive interpretation of the First Amendment allowing criminal actions in the name of journalism. In the case of those journalists who gave bribes to FBI agents, they can publish the leaks they purchased with First Amendment protection.
But the First Amendment doesn’t provide them with a defense from being indicted and prosecuted for bribing a federal agent.
Well what do you know. I can indeed tell the future. When this story broke I said just wait and see, it won’t take the left eight hours before they attack Baker’s credibility. The leftist on this blog have been sent out with marching orders in hand to carry out the mission. One of them known as Anonymous admitted yesterday that she is a CIA agent. Big Brother is hard at work to eliminate all descent. He relies heavily on the main stream government press. Now that Baker has been silenced Big Brother grins broadly as he sips his morning brew. The stench of his breath can be smelled throughout the land.
“Looks like you have egg on your face! [. . .] exposed Steven Baker for what he is–a fraud–who didn’t go work for Glenn Beck until 2023.”
The Left is so itching to smear and to excuse its intimidation tactics, that it doesn’t think through the implications of its own comments.
Biden’s DOJ/FBI had Baker’s case for some two years. No arrest. Then *after* he became a “Blaze” journalist, with a much larger platform for dissent, they arrest him — during an election year.
An attempt to exculpate Garland’s DOJ is in fact an indictment.
Thank you so much for keeping up with all this. I guess since Jan six was an insurrection- baker was imbeded reporter Then ask if same type inbed was caught in Iraq what treatment? He’s getting off easy! 4 misters other country’s might have chopped him up into little pieces and they denied it. Like in turkey. “They” will go to great lengths to control the narrative – the fact is he was a journalist any the categories you mention – but are journalist the “press”? There in lies the rub today – we all have freedom of speech but who has that additional freedom of the press? Is it enough he sold his stories to the press? Idk. But it’s clear the usg is treating him like he’s not the press. As they are assange. So it doesn’t matter the categories of journalism you outline .
The q is who is the press? The 4th estate?
And on thar front – we know the “press” gets info they have to with hold until d days. And we know how Obama wanted govt agents in press rooms et al. So like all levers of power the “,press” has been coopeded. We sit and wonder type of journalist when we haven’t defined the press!?? Unless baker is the press – his rights to free speech are like all the peons- the question is what makes him the press?
Selective prosecution based on viewpoint discrimination is abuse of power.
Question.
Why is Trump accused of insurrection for telling his rally attendees to peacefully make their voices heard? The rioters did not follow that direction.
Why are Joe Biden and Kamala Harris not guilty of insurrection for urging BLM and Antifa protestors to riot, commit arson, loot, burn down police precincts, seize entire city blocks as “autonomous” zones i.e. CHOP, and even going so far as to bail out rioters from jail so they could go commit more violence and property crimes? Those riots gripped the nation for a year, and caused over $1 billion in damages. How is that not insurrection?
Why is it reason for a Republican to believe an election was stolen, but not a Democrat? Democrats used to be for protesting and occupying state and federal capitols, before they were against it. If these protestors had been wearing red handmaid cloaks, they would not have been called insurrectionists. Was the protest at the Madison, WI Capitol an insurrection?
We are rapidly descending to a single party state, with dissenters harshly punished.
Karen nails it -indeed I know of someone who’s CAT equipment was destroyed by blm – and insurance won’t pay bc it was a riot. But their ring leaders are not charged either. And we all read Molly balls 26 page report how “they” were gunna burn us to the ground if Biden didn’t win. We are way beyond selective prosecution we are in a latent war. Yet our enemies use hypotheticals to define trumps immunity case – go from his orders to peacefully protest and be heard – to him ordering seal team six -hypothetically to assisnate his political rival. Which is absurd because everyone on seal team six has taken the constitution and statutory oath and will only obey lawful orders … as well as all the generals in between the sink and cl team six. But some how a socially professor cracked trumps code! Whilst less than 10 percent of j sixes have previously taken the oath per the Chicago professor who tracks it . So these delusional leftists on one hand say ppl who oath will blindly follow trumps secret code – whist 90 % never took an oath. Meanwhile 100%of seal team six has …and would see the blatant unlawfullness immediately of the hypothetical they use in the immunity case….it makes me sick.
Wondering what outfit to wear during a category 5 hurricane……..
The Herritage case is extremely concerning.
OT: Two Politico stories.
THEN:
Dozens of former intelligence officials say that the Hunter laptop looks as if it holds Russian disinformation. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276
NOW:
The prospect of a second Trump presidency has intelligence agencies on edge because they fear he may politicize them. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/26/trump-intelligence-agency-national-security-00142968
I hope he guts these lying, subversive, election-meddling-scum agencies. They are a greater danger than the KGB was.
Did they think we wouldn’t remember or care?
“[Trump] wants to weaponize the intelligence community.” Plus Baker’s arrest and refueling the J6 hysteria.
That’s the Left’s 2024 presidential campaign.
They can’t run on the man. He’s too feeble.
They can’t tout their policies. They’re a disaster.
So they manipulate the public via irrational fear.
Young says:
I hope he guts these lying, subversive, election-meddling-scum agencies. They are a greater danger than the KGB was.
Presuming he is elected, the odds are that those police state fascists have no more to fear of a president Trump than Hillary Clinton did.
Trump promised Clinton – and America – at the one debate that if elected, he would appoint a Special Counsel to investigate all of her dealings while AG.
After his election, it changed to saying the Clintons were very fine people and they’d suffered enough.
If Trump were a tenth the angry abuser of power that they portray him as, there would be dozens of DoJ, FBI, State Department and journalists making a list of countries without an extradition treaty with the USA.
The reason the Soviet Democrats, bureaucrats, and media cross over the line into deep sleeze and even criminality is because they feel confident that when Republicans are in power, they will not say “Tit for tat… get your lawyers on speed dial because now it’s our turn using your rules”. A few months of Roger Stone raids and arrests of FBI, the Vindman’s, the journalists who paid bribes to FBI working on the Trump “investigation” using the Russia Dossier… there would be a change in attitude along with Soviet Democrats feeling the same fear that those whose crime was working for Trump have felt.
Ugly as it would be, I have yet to hear a valid suggestion of any other way of knocking this kind of lawfare and political and journalistic abuse back.
OT: Court of Appeals rules that DOJ improperly added sentencing enhancements to J-6 defendants.
Everyone knew that they had, but I had come to despair of the rule of law in this country. This decision is heartening but the bad actors are still in place and have power and don’t give a crap about the rule of law or equal justice. Still not persuaded that we will make it.
Jonathan: Looks like you have egg on your face! Sherlock Anonymous has provided a link to a NBC News article (3/1/24) by a REAL journalist, Ryan J. Reilly, who has exposed Steven Baker for what he is–a fraud–who didn’t go work for Glenn Beck until 2023. On Jan. 6 Baker was just another trespasser! That’s why he got arrested. There are credentialed journalists and then there are wannabees like Baker. Now we can put your column into the category of just another false flag op ginned up by MTG and the right-wing media. Eventually the truth will come out!
Why was he arrested as a trespasser if he was walking through a public building with the doors open?
Why was he arrested when other journalists were not ?
Why isn’t the press as a whole outraged and standing behind him ?
Because the left leaning MSM has returned to the era of yellow journalism.
Edwardmahl: Why is it that you ignore facts staring you right in the face? If I leave my front door open and someone enters without my permission that’s still “trespass”. In the case of the insurrectionists they had to break through windows to gain access to the Capitol. We don’t know the exact timeline about when Baker entered the Capitol building. I suspect it was probably after the doors had been opened from the inside by the insurrectionists. But when Baker walked into the building he was still committing trespass. Hundreds have been convicted by juries for that crime. What alt universe are you living in?
Dennis McIntyre, with zero self awareness, made this fraudulent observation
Edwardmahl: Why is it that you ignore facts staring you right in the face?
There’s actual facts, and then there’s Dennis’s Big Democrat Difference facts as He Speaks His Truth.
Same Dennis who claims the J6 defendants got the exact same fair response from the DoJ and FBI as the rioters who, a few months before, hospitalized 50+ Secret Service and Capitol Police while attempting to get in the White House to murder Trump and his family. (nobody believes they just wanted selfies with the President, Dennis).
Same Dennis who claims that “Special Counsel” Jack Smith, who SCOTUS in the McDonnell decision named as a threat to the republic, is a legitimate, unbiased Special Counsel without a blemish on his record.
Dennis’s Big Democrat Difference.
There are credentialed journalists and then there are wannabees like Baker.
Dennis the retard believes there is a federal bureau of journalist credentialing.
Dennis can not read
“Baker would later not only supply stories to his main media outlet, Blaze News, but also sell videos to The New York Times and HBO.”
DM It is Correct that Baker did not work for the Blaze until 2023. It is Not correct that he was not a Journlist – as Turley noted -= and again you can not read, he sold video and reporting from J6 to the NYT and other outlets.
Whether you like it or not Naker is a journalist in the most formal classic sense.
That said – even your own argument runs afoul of legal precident. Dating all the way to our founding – a Journalist is someone who says they are a journalist and who subsequently reports and publishes what they witnessed.
Do you think Ben Franklin went to Journalism school ?
Baker has been acting as an independent journalist since 1995.
Baker was at the capitol not only in the same way as NBC and CBS reporters but Literally walking with them, as well as observing recording what took place and later selling his stories to outlets like NYT – But then again – you either can not read or do not bother to.
You have embarrassed yourself.
But thank you for citing Ryan Reilly – as that provides me with the identity of another left wing nut journalist incapable of checking the facts before reporting garbage.
I would further note that while the first amendment of the US constitution guarantees freedom of the press, it does not define what a journalist is.
Freedom of the press does NOT guarantee some special priviledge to journalist.
DOJ is correct that Journalists are NOT protected from criminal prosecution just because they are accompanying and reporting on criminal activity.
If J6 was an actual insurection or if those moving through the capitol were committing
a crime – then Baker was, as were the “journalists” from NBC, CBS, … etc.
What you have is ANOTHER case of selective prosecution.
Baker inarguably was a journalist – as much as any other journalist in the capitol on J6.
Further, both the protestors, and all journalists – including Baker either were or were not all committing crimes.
What is true for one person walking throught he capitol on J6 is true of all of them – Journalist or not.
The Cathrine Herridge case is instructive – and as Turley notes enlighting with respect to the collapse of US journalism.
Herridge refuses to name her source for a story. This is a common behavior of journalists – right left or otherwise and has been for over a century. But there is no actual recognized legal priviledge.
Herridge is being held in contempt and could go to jail if she refuses to name her source.
She would not be the first jorunalist to do so.
But by refusing to provide her source to DOJ/FBI she is in very real contempt of court and violating the law.
I know this is difficult for you but it is actually possible to violate the law AND behave in a moral principled fashion, Just as it is possible to follow the law – while behaving immorally and without principles.
I support Cathrine Herridge, but I also accept like many other journalists in the past she is stiking up for her principles and her behaviour is a reflection of the highest principles of journalism.
What is unusual – is as Turley notes -the LACK of any support from other journalists and the media.
Those of you on the left are so drowning in your ideology that you have lost sight of any principles.
WaPo, NYT, all leading Journalists should be outraged over Cathrine Herridge, and should be writing opeds and providing for her legal defense – as journalists have done for over a century.
But no – Cathrine Herridge is a respected and hard hitting conservative journalist – and the left can not possibly stand behind someone with the highest integrity and principles of the profession – if god forbid they are a conservative.
We have seen the same with the left regaring Julian Assange – Who is not only a journalist but also a publisher. Who was the darling of the left when the information Wkikileaks provided dicomforted those the left dislikes. But Assange made a mistake.
First he pissed of the Deep State – with his revalations of the lawless conduct of US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Then he pissed of Hillary clinton by leaking intercepted messages from her about other forieng leaders while she was SoS.
And finally he compounded all of that by publishing the DNC Emails that deeplu embarrases Clinton and the DNC.
Assange is an actual journalist – AND PUBLISHER, doing work that most of the press – right or left is to fearful to do and speaking truth to power without regard for what that power is
And yet Assange is languishing in British prison for no crime at all – becaus ethe US wants to extradite him for the crime of journalism.
Yet where is the press defending him.
It was rummoured – and tRump has confirmed that he was asked to consider pardoning Assange in 2020, and likely would have done so But for the pressure put on him by McConnell and Graham and other neocons who trheatened to vote to impeach him if he pardoned Assange.
Hopefully he will do so in 2025.
Regardless the evidence is in – the left is drowning in double standards, and has sacrified the principles of journalism for a failed set of ideological beliefs.
In know little of Baker or Herridge, Except that Reilly and the others in the left MSM should be defending Baker, Herridge, Assange and others – regardless of their politics who are being presecuted for journalism.
They and you should think about the fact that in 2025 – it could the left leaing journalists who need protection from DOJ/FBI.
You tell us all the time that Trump will do the evil political things that …… Biden and Obama have already done.
And that it will be the end of democracy as we know it.
Aparently targeting journalists is only a threat to democracy if the journalists targeted are on the left.
Not to mention what Obama did to James Rosen and his family, and Sheryl Attkinson.
John Say posted:
DOJ is correct that Journalists are NOT protected from criminal prosecution just because they are accompanying and reporting on criminal activity.
They certainly are protected as long as they’re working hand in glove with the DoJ and FBI doing God’s Work: get Trump!
The same DoJ did NOT indict and prosecute a single one of the journalists who their own Inspector General found bribed 30 FBI agents involved in the “Trump Russia Dossier investigation”. Nor did they prosecute – or even fire – any of the agents who accepted those bribes (see a pattern here?) The IG substituted the word “gratuities” for bribery, just as he used the words “lacked candor” rather than ‘perjury’ or ‘lying’ for McCabe, Strzok and others who perjured themselves during his investigation. But changing the language is just trying to put lipstick on a pig.
I will state that they have no reasonable excuse for not prosecuting. If they try the excuse of giving journalists a pass on the much more serious charges of bribing a federal agent because it would be seen as attempting a chilling effect on journalism, then that excuse goes down the Dennis McIntyre toilet with the prosecution of this journalist.
It’s the Big Democrat Difference In Democracy ushered in with Obama’s first day as president.
Dennis McIntyre, the angry police state fascist, tried this sleaze:
Jonathan: Looks like you have egg on your face!…Now we can put your column into the category of just another false flag op
Shocking that you would insult your very close personal friend Jonathan like that, Dennis! The NYT journalist that had to crawl through a broken window to get in, instead of walking through an open door was a Soviet Democrat Different journalist who you give a pass because why? He has one paycheque, from the NYT, while Baker sells his journalism to multiple outlets..
You pimp for and support your fellow police state fascist, Jack Smith, as a legitimate qualified Special Counsel – despite SCOTUS calling him out in a written decision as a threat to the republic. Given that you reject what a legitimate Special Counsel is, it is predictable that the same police state fascist ideology that you follow would refuse to acknowledge Baker is a journalist.
Baker Was NOT An Established Journalist On January 6th
The former lead singer of a David Bowie tribute band who entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, licensed his footage to media outlets, and now works as a writer for Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze” website has been arrested on misdemeanor Capitol attack charges after turning himself into federal authorities in Texas.
Steve Baker, a musician and libertarian writer who was a frequent presence at the federal courthouse in Washington during the Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy trial and other Jan. 6 cases, faces the same four standard misdemeanors as many lower-level Capitol riot defendants.
Baker explained in a podcast after Jan. 6 that, as a full-time musician he “found himself suddenly unemployed” in 2020 after the Covid lockdowns, and so decided to “ramp up” a project he’d started a decade earlier: An online community known as “The Pragmatic Libertarian,” which he later rebranded as “The Pragmatic Constitutionalist.”
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/musician-libertarian-writer-works-blaze-arrested-jan-6-charges-rcna140041
…………………………………….
On January 6th, Baker was not employed by any news organization. He was simply one of hundreds of trespassers that day. By Professor Turley’s definition, any trespasser recording videos with their phone was arguably a ‘journalist’.
Anonymous: Thank you Sherlock for exposing what Turley tries to tell us is a serious story. He now has egg on his face!
Dennis – it is not turley with egg on his face. It is You. Though I beleive DOJ did not go forward with those charges – DOJ threatened to charge Baker with Racketteering for the crime of “selling his stories and video of J6 accross state lines” – whether you like it or not – the “Bake is not a journalist” rant is ignorant nonsense. There are very few MSM reporters who have filed as many stories on J6 as Baker has – and gotten paid for them.
While the ATS is actually correct – walking through a protest with a cellphone and recording events for the purpose of publishing them is the minimum necescary to be a “journalist”. There is no requirement that you make money, or sell your stories. Only that you observe and possibly record for the purpose of reporting and publishing.
That said – Baker is more than a hobby journalist. He is a professional. Maybe not one you like, but still a professional.
He is more of a journalist than “paparatzi” are – and yes THEY are journalists too.
He has published MANY stories prior to, and after J6. Subsequent to J6 he found hi9s J6 reporting to be profitable – because the MSM had so badly covered it, because they had so few journalists at J6 – that Bakers reporting was used heavily by the MSM – and outlets throughout the world.
Further Baker has continued to cover J6 after J6, filing many many stories and video about J6 related news.
If he had embedded himself with the Hamas terrorists that raped, murdered, and kidnapped Israeli civilians on October 7, he would be invited to all of the best Georgetown cocktail parties.
Correct – and that would be journalism too.
Why do you need to be employed by “a news organization” to be a journalist? If you are writing a history of Rome, you don’t need to be employed by a university to be considered “an historian”. Indeed, Edward Gibbon was not employed by a university when he wrote The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. In other respects you are entirely right. Was Thomas Paine an ‘Established journalist’? It’s a silly argument.
BTW, read the opening paragraph of Gibbon’ masterpiece. It is arresting, gorgeous in its way.
“In the second century of the Christian era the empire of Rome comprehended the fairest part of the earth, and the most civilized portion of mankind. ****”
That by me.
These twits are nuts and ill informed – they took one abysmally researched hit peice and as the left typically does – bought it hook line and sinker and never bother to check the facts.
Baker is one of the few primary source journalists on J6. Not just about the events of that day, but the ongoing story.
He was FIRST to break the story of the presence of Feds – which has subsequently been confirmed by Newsweek.
Had he been an actual citizen journalist using his iphone to post videos on FB, he would still qualify as a journalist.
But Baker has a long list of journalistic credits – including reporting for left leaning yellow journalist rags like NYT.
Baker Was NOT An Established Journalist On January 6th
That is not a ‘thing’ If a person is reporting events, they are a journalist.
Like the Russia hoax, you are claiming facts that hold to relevance.
Was Thomas Paine a journalist? Did he have 1st amendment rights to freedom of the Press? Because that is what is protected. Freedom of the printing press. Those racist, non degreed founders knew attempting to define a journalist was idiotic.
The MSM wants to pretend it’s a thing because they want to suppress competition.
As long as one can order a rent-a-clown for parties the MSM will have competition.
You do not have to be employed by any news organization to be a journalist – I guess you have never heard of the term “Free Lance”.
Nor can you read.
“Baker would later not only supply stories to his main media outlet, Blaze News, but also sell videos to The New York Times and HBO.”
What is it that journalists do ? They sell reporting and video.
Baker was no more or less a tresspassor than the journalists from NBC and CBS that accompanied him through the Capitol.
You can not tresspass on the world most improtant government created public formum for free speech – the US capitol, while congress is in session.
And you can not tresspass on public govenrment buildings when you enter through an open door with hundreds of others.
“By Professor Turley’s definition, any trespasser recording videos with their phone was arguably a ‘journalist’.”
If they do so for the purpose of publishing their stories and videos – yes.
I would note that while a journalist CAN use a cell phone to record video – Baker went through the Capitol with a professional video camera.
He put out notice on his journalism blog prior to J6 that he was going to cover J6, He went to DC for the purpose of covering J6, Turley noted two of the outlets he has sold his reporting to – but Baker noted that he has sold his J6 reporting to news outlets accross the world.
Further he has been reporting n J6 since J6 – Baker was one of the first to note that there appeared to be Feds present in the crowd on J6,
He has been engaged in communications with the DOJ since J6, He has letters from the DOJ essentially telling him to stop providing unfavorable coverage or they will arrest him. They have been threatening to arrest him every couple of months for the past 3 years.
He has been reporting on J6 since then – he is one of the reporters that has gone into the DC jail to report on conditions there.
There are likely very few reporters who have done more first hand reporting on J6 – by that I mean not merely reporting from the capitol on J6 – but at the J6 hearings, on the J5 investigations, at the DC jail.
Slightly off topic, but also on topic.
How do discern a ‘citizen journalist’ from a rioter who has a camera?
That’s the tough one.
But on that same topic… the latest news is that the Dems want to go after Trump after the election.
So riddle me this… how could the sitting POTUS commit insurrection if he is the defacto government?
This is why we need to clean house and vote the political class out of office.
Unfortunately on the Democrat side… those up and coming are worse that those already in office.
Garvey will lose to Schiff.
No, I mean he’ll win the actual election, but watch the ballots get stuffed in Schiff’s name.
-G
Adam Bomb & Gavin Newksom – California will never Grow Up – La La Land
“How do discern a ‘citizen journalist’ from a rioter who has a camera?
That’s the tough one.”
It is not tough at all.
The person who uses their iphone or observes and then later publishes is a journalist. PERIOD.
At the same time – that does not matter. Just as freedom of speech does not allow you carte blanche to comitt other actual crimes,
nor does freedom of the press.
While the “tresspassing” charges are nonsense – on two independent basis.
You can not tresspass when you enter an open door to a public government building.
2nd Government can not thwart peoples right to protest =, engage in free speech, of freedom of the press or the right to petition govenrment by closing down the pre-eminent government created public forum in the entire world.
There are myriads of supreme court cases that government can not do through the back door, what he can not do through the front.
Government can not use facially neutral laws – like those on tresspass to infringe on first amendment rights.
There is absolutely Zero doubt that protesting in the capitol while congress was in session would have been protected first amendment activity had the capitol been open. Govenrment can not lock the doors to a governemtn created public forum to thwart speech it does not like.
Many of us were offended by Schumer and others in front of the supreme court ranting about dobbs and pounding on and actually shifting the gigantic bronze doors tot he supreme court.
Many of us were shocked and offended by the Kavanaugh protests.
But aside from specific criminal acts – which were all punished lightly – if at all, which is appropriate at protests that merely get out of hand,
no one was charged or prosecuted with Tresspass or myriads of other fellonies and misdemeanors that would have applied – because DOJ was smart enough to understand that applying those to protestors violates the first amendment.
Regardless Actual journalists including baker have no more or less protection against criminal prosecution than the “journalists” from NBC and CBS that accompanied Baker.
What you actually have is more selective prosecution.
You must either correctly conclude that DOJ can not prosecute anyone for “tresspassing”
Or incorrectly that they can prosecute tresspass, in which case there is no protection from violations of the law afforded to a journalist.
And DOJ can arrest and prosecute Baker, but they also must arrest and prosecute the reporters with him from NBC or CBS.
Choosing based on politics or ideology is bias.
Choosing based on content is first amendment as applied viewpoint discrimination.
Assange Expected Pentagon To Assist WikiLeaks
Five human rights organisations including Amnesty International and the Open Society Institute, have written to WikiLeaks to express their concerns about the biggest leak in US military history, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The WikiLeaks editor, Julian Assange, replied to the letter by asking the groups concerned to help WikiLeaks redact the names. He also threatened to expose Amnesty if it refused to provide staff to help with the task, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Assange said WikiLeaks had tried to comply with a private White House request to redact the names of informants before publication, but the US authorities had refused to assist.
Assange expressed his frustration on the WikiLeaks Twitter feed yesterday. “Pentagon wants to bankrupt us by refusing to assist review. Media won’t take responsibility. Amnesty won’t. What to do?” he tweeted.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/10/afghanistan-war-logs-wikileaks-human-rights-groups
Let’s get this straight: ‘Julian Assange actually expected the Pentagon to assist in processing volumes of information stolen from Pentagon files’. Well that’s reasonable. ..Not..!!
Julian Assange honestly didn’t care about protecting the identities of Afghan informants. That wasn’t ‘his’, problem, Assange felt. And notice that even Amnesty International was beseeching Assange not to disclose those names. But Assange felt put upon to have to go through all those files in search of names. It was easier to just dump the files!
^^ Another military-industrial complex paid troll
REGARDING ABOVE:
It’s beyond weird when Trumpers mimic the language of Vietnam era hippies.
The term is from early 1961 in the Eisenhower administration. Only an ignoramus would characterize it as being from Viet Nam era hippies. And what is “beyond weird” is when the erstwhile liberal party and liberal media become propagandists for the powerful government and corporate interests instead of being skeptical of them and questioning them. Remember a bygone era when liberals used to say “question authority“ and “dissent is patriotic“? Those days now seem quaint. Now the Dems (and Rinos) are all for unchecked corporate greed, arms trafficking, endless wars, and the bankrupting of America, all so that an entire generation of Ukrainian men can be slaughtered. That’s your “liberal” party, America, I hop you like it.
We are in the midst of a huge political shift.
On many issues that did not clearly divide politically in the past – now they do.
Other issues where the left reflected on side and the right another – this has flipped.
Republicans have a long history of near isolationism. The Bushes and GOP neocons are the exception to those Republican values.
Though MOSTLY republicans favor a strong defense – that we do not use.
Regardless Trump is a return to the republicans values of the 50’s.
Republcians have always been and remain more patriotic than democrats.
But in the past they have been far more inclined to trust government.
Today no one trusts govenrment – but republicans least of all.
This is a return to earlier conservative values.
Absolutely Republicans are sounding almost like 60’s hippes on some issues – though more libertarian than liberal than hippies.
At the same time the LEFT is sounding far more like the extreme right in the past.
We do not have a perfect reversal of positions. Democrats are still the party of Big Govenrment, republicans are not.
But Democrats are increasingly the party of big business, Republicans are not.
Republicans are increasingly the party of workers – democrats are not.
LEts see you get the facts correct – and bugger the analysis.
First Assange has no obligation to redact information that would expose sources and methods.
The Pentagon papers were published unredacted.
This is a non-story in the sense that Assanges conduct was perfectly legal REGARDLESS.
But it is a huge story – because Wikileaks sought to assure that sources were protected and govenrment ignored them.
If sources were exposed by Wikileaks – that is not a crime.
But what is true is that sources were exposed because of Government.
John Say posted:
First Assange has no obligation to redact information that would expose sources and methods… This is a non-story in the sense that Assanges conduct was perfectly legal REGARDLESS.
If he had leaked (for example>, the coordinates of every single nuclear weapon we have and a means to break the encryption used by our nuclear missile subs to receive orders, would it still be lawful? An argument can be made even that is covered by First Amendment protections. I would argue in response that you reach a point where First Amendment protections do not protect when that publishing violates serious criminal statutes.
But what about actions BEFORE Assange had those documents in his hands? Government investigators claim that Assange encouraged The Private Formerly Known As Bradley Manning to steal the documents and provided he/her/it with the instructions that enabled Manning to commit the theft that he did otherwise have.
We can claim the government is lying that Assange actively aided, instructed, and encouraged Manning with the theft of documents to enable that theft – they often lie.
But if they aren’t lying, then the First Amendment doesn’t protect Assange from his criminal acts carried out to make it possible for Manning to steal the classified material he then gave to Assange.
The same as it does not cover the journalists who bribed dozens of FBI agents for leaks about the Trump “investigation” that they then published in the NYT, WaPoo, etc.
I have exactly ZERO sympathy for Assange or Manning, his fellow “journalist”. Just as I have zero sympathy for the journalists who bribed those FBI agents and the agents themselves if they were charged in relation to that bribery.
Just because a child rapist gives you the identity of the person who committed an armed robbery of a neighborhood liquor store, doesn’t mean you give them a pass for raping children in the neighborhood to show your gratitude.
It is interesting how the left eats its own.
Assange was the darling of the left when what he published hurt republicans and big business.
But when his publiscations started to make Hillary look bad – now he is a criminal.
Julian Assange honestly didn’t care about protecting the identities of Afghan informants.
Anyone who honestly and truly believes that Assange, Snowden, etc read every single one of the millions of classified documents they stole to ensure they weren’t going to expose the identity of an informant, agent, etc that would lead to them being murdered or imprisoned by an adversarial nation before allowing adversarial nations access to those documents needs to pull their heads out of their asses. And just because a child rapist informs you of the identity of the person who committed an armed robbery of a liquor store doesn’t mean you give them a pass on being prosecuted as a child rapist.
More to the point, assuming Assange does qualify as a journalist, when does journalism mixed in with a healthy dose of criminality become no longer acceptable?
The Inspector General’s investigation of what the FBI did to Trump in the 2016 election (while at the same time dropping four criminal investigations of Clinton) found that 30 FBI agents involved in some capacity in the Trump “investigation” accepted gratuities from the NYT, WaPoo, CNN, etc. The IG also used “lacked candor” for the purjured testimony of McCabe and Strzok, when plain language would be to say he lied. Similarly, using the word “gratuities” is substituting for the act of taking a bribe.
One place to start with cleaning up criminality in journalism would be indicting every single one of those journalists who coordinated and partnered with those FBI agents to push the “Russia Dossier leaks”. We are well down the road to an enormously over-expansive interpretation of the First Amendment allowing criminal actions in the name of journalism. But in the case of those journalists who gave bribes to FBI agents, they can publish the leaks they purchased with First Amendment protection – but the First Amendment doesn’t protect them from being prosecuted for bribing a federal agent.