NSA surveillance In 2004, according to
The Washington Post, Baker was responsible for the discovery that "the government's failure to share information" regarding the
NSA electronic surveillance program had "rendered useless a federal screening system" insisted upon by the
United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to prevent "tainted information"—in U.S. case law, "
fruit of the poisonous tree"—from being used before the court. Baker was reported to have informed presiding federal judge
Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the FISC, whose complaints to the Justice Department led to the temporary suspension of the NSA program. In 2007, according to
The Washington Post, Baker revealed that he had informed Attorney General
Alberto Gonzales "about mistakes the FBI has made or problems or violations or compliance incidents" prior to Gonzales' April 2005 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that "[t]here has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse" after 2001. The probe, described as "a strange interagency dispute that ... attracted the attention of senior lawmakers", reportedly "ended with a decision not to charge anyone," per
The Washington Post. In September 2021, Special Counsel
John Durham indicted
Michael Sussmann, a partner for the law firm
Perkins Coie, alleging he falsely told Baker during a September 2016 meeting that he was not representing a client for their discussion. Durham alleged Sussman was actually representing "a U.S. Technology Industry Executive, a U.S. Internet Company and the Hillary Clinton Presidential Campaign." Sussmann focuses on privacy and cybersecurity law and had approached Baker to discuss what then appeared to be suspicious communications between computer servers at the Russian
Alfa-Bank and the
Trump Organization. Sussmann had represented the
Democratic National Committee regarding the
Russian hacking of its computer network. Sussmann's attorneys denied he was representing the Clinton campaign and he pleaded not guilty to the charge. Sussmann would later be found not guilty by a jury.
Views on encryption Baker was the FBI's general counsel during the
FBI–Apple encryption dispute, and took credit for "leading" the bureau's efforts to access the suspect's iPhone. Baker had long supported legislation requiring encryption systems to include a means to allow access by law enforcement with a proper warrant, as a way to address a phenomenon law enforcement officers call "
going dark". He called for the U.S. to embrace a
zero trust security model, and said that "public safety officials should also become among the strongest supporters of widely available strong encryption". ==See also==