James Baker

Former FBI lawyer James Baker said in his testimony to Congress in October that he originally believed Hillary Clinton should have been charged for mishandling classified information.

James Baker gave two testimonies to Congress in October in an unclassified setting and his transcripts still have not been made public.

Mr. Baker, who is currently under criminal investigation for his leaks to the media, told Congressman John Ratcliffe that Hillary’s mishandling of classified information was “alarming and appalling” and believed her use of a private server was enough to secure an indictment so prosecutors could charge her for violations under the Espionage Act.

James Baker believed Hillary Clinton should have been charged all the way up until then-FBI Director James Comey usurped the DOJ and publicly announced Clinton would not be charged.

TRENDING: Unhinged Quebec Woman Pascale Ferrier Identified as Suspect in Case of Ricin Letter Sent to Trump White House

Mr. Baker said he changed his mind after arguing with top FBI brass, including James Comey — Comey, however, had already drafted his exoneration letter with the help of Peter Strzok, who changed the language from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless.”

Investigative reporter Sara Carter obtained the exchange between Rep. Ratcliffe (R-TX) and James Baker:

“As the FBI general counsel, you originally believed it was appropriate, it was appropriate to charge Hillary Clinton with violation of the law for mishandling classified information,” asked Ratcliffe, who is with the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Baker answered. He described reviewing a classified “binder” containing material related to Clinton’s investigation that contained sensitive and highly classified emails she was transmitting over her semi-secured server. “My original belief after, well, after having conducted the investigation and towards the end of it, then sitting down and reading a binder of her materials,” said Baker. “I thought that it was alarming, appalling, whatever words I said,” he said. “And argued with others about why they thought she shouldn’t be charged.” The lawmakers and committee investigators then questioned Baker as to what legal standard he based his original opinion on. “Well, it was the statutes that we were considering at the time,” said Baker. “It was the nature and scope of the classified information that, to me, initially, when I looked at it, I thought these folks should know that this stuff is classified, that it was alarming what they were talking about, especially some of the most highly classified stuff.”

According to Sara Carter, James Baker also told Inspector General Michael Horowitz that Hillary Clinton should have been charged:

“You told the Inspector Gen. that the conduct of Hillary Clinton and her associates was appalling with respect to the handling of classified information, right,” Ratcliffe asks Baker. “I believe that’s correct,” Baker answers. Stunningly, Ratcliffe asks Baker if he still believes Clinton’s mishandling of the classified information is appalling. Baker answers with one powerful word “yes.”

James Baker said he was eventually convinced by Comey and other Hillary sycophants in the FBI that they couldn’t prove Hillary Clinton’s intentions in mishandling classified information.

So there you have it, the top FBI lawyer believed Hillary Clinton should have been charged but the FBI was so pro-Hillary that they spent months arguing her case for her to save her from being indicted and thrown in prison.

The question is, will newly-confirmed Attorney General Bill Barr finally pursue justice and put Hillary Clinton behind bars where she belongs? Doubtful.