Jordan Seeks Clarity on DOJ’s Targeting of Blaze Journalist Steve Baker
Clash of Journalism and Justice: Unpacking the Controversy Surrounding Reporter Steve Baker
In a piercing demand for transparency, House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan is questioning the motives behind the Department of Justice’s recent actions against Blaze reporter Steve Baker. As a prominent figure who’s been meticulously scrutinizing the fallout of the Jan. 6 events, Baker now faces legal repercussions with four charges tied to his professional duties on that fateful day.
Seeking Answers and Accountability
It was in a detailed letter dated March 12, where Jordan called upon U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C., Matthew Graves, to supply documents and explanations pertaining to not only Baker’s arrest and subsequent charges but also any actions taken against journalists reporting on January 6, 2021.
“There are serious concerns about selective prosecution in this case as well as the Department’s commitment to the First Amendment rights of journalists,” Jordan stated emphatically.
Such concerns are amplified by the notable fact that other reporters present during the Capitol chaos have eluded charges, whereas Baker, known for his frank critique of the DOJ’s conduct regarding the Jan. 6 probes, now finds himself in legal crosshairs.
Highlighting a chilling scenario for press freedom, Jordan quoted Baker’s attorney, “The Department ’is not allowed to decide what press coverage it likes and what press coverage offends it, and take prosecutorial action based on those judgments’.”
The Arrest: A Harsh Reality
Despite vagueness surrounding the exact charges, Baker complied with the FBI’s instruction to turn himself in last month. The extent of his processing was startling: fingerprinted, photographed, and shackled, Baker’s treatment by the FBI was more reminiscent of a high-profile criminal than that of a journalist facing misdemeanor charges—a point of contention noted by Jordan.
A Question of Fair Treatment
Jordan’s allegations of harassment don’t come lightly; they suggest the DOJ could be using its immense power to silence a dissenting voice. This action not only diverges from the DOJ’s principle of impartial justice but also, as Jordan points out, “violates the Department’s mission of equal justice under the law.”
Further illustrating the concern for fair justice, Jordan disclosed that the Judiciary Committee has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court. It scrutinizes the DOJ’s potential overreach in applying a financial crimes statute to impose severe prison terms on January 6 defendants.
“All of these issues raise concerns about the Biden Administration’s commitment to equal application of the law,” Jordan concludes, calling into question the integrity of the justice system and its fidelity to the constitutional rights it’s sworn to uphold.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
