Retired FBI Special Agent Thomas Baker joined Chicago’s Morning Answer with Dan Proft to discuss the origins of what he sees as a slow but dangerous transformation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation—from a fact-based law enforcement agency to a politically compromised, intelligence-driven bureaucracy.
Baker, the author of The Fall of the FBI: How a Once Great Agency Became a Threat to Democracy, traced the shift back to a single moment: September 15, 2001. Just four days after the 9/11 attacks, newly appointed FBI Director Robert Mueller briefed President George W. Bush at Camp David on the Bureau’s successful identification and tracking of the 19 hijackers. Rather than praise, Mueller was dismissed with a demand: “I want to know how you’re going to prevent the next one.” That moment, Baker said, triggered a cultural pivot toward intelligence work at the expense of criminal investigation and evidence gathering.
According to Baker, this pivot accelerated under Mueller and continued under James Comey, resulting in a growing detachment from accountability and transparency. “A law enforcement agency deals in facts. An intelligence agency deals in estimates,” Baker said, noting how this shift enabled the speculative—and ultimately false—Russiagate narrative to take hold.
The discussion ranged from the FBI’s handling of Hillary Clinton’s private email server and its origin in the Steele Dossier to the Bureau’s role in perpetuating a Trump-Russia collusion hoax. Baker acknowledged that Mueller’s tenure as special counsel was marked by staff-led decisions, particularly by Andrew Weissmann, and described Mueller’s eventual testimony before Congress as a “pathetic” display that exposed his cognitive decline. “He clearly wasn’t up to the job,” Baker said, adding that Mueller’s failure to control the narrative allowed partisans like Rep. Adam Schiff to keep the conspiracy theory alive long after the report found no evidence of collusion.
On the subject of Comey, Baker said the former FBI director operated as a “hands-off” figure who floated above decisions, contrasting him with Mueller’s earlier, more hands-on approach. However, he emphasized that Comey’s decisions, particularly his public exoneration of Clinton while still criticizing her, frustrated agents, especially in the FBI’s New York office, who viewed the Bureau’s handling of her case as soft.
Turning to the Epstein investigation, Baker expressed frustration with how the case has been handled and the growing public demand for transparency. He acknowledged that multiple DOJ investigations—into Epstein’s plea deal in Florida, his arrest in New York, and his suspicious death in federal custody—have created a mountain of paperwork and interviews. But he argued that the public deserves answers, especially when it comes to why no other perpetrators have been named or prosecuted.
“It was mishandled,” Baker said, adding that Bill Barr, then attorney general, was furious at the Bureau of Prisons for allowing Epstein’s death to occur under its watch. He suggested that Congress, with its broader latitude and ability to compel public testimony, may be better positioned to uncover the full truth. Victims who are willing to come forward, he said, could finally shed light on who was involved beyond Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
Baker also addressed the recent House subpoenas issued to former attorneys general, FBI directors, and even the Clintons in connection with the Epstein case. While he was skeptical about new criminal prosecutions, he said such efforts might at least help “get the record corrected” for the sake of history.
As for the broader political fallout from the FBI’s entanglements in Russiagate and the Epstein case, Baker pointed to the erosion of public trust. He echoed journalist Lee Smith’s assertion that the FBI has spent the last 25 years protecting the Clintons, though he called that assessment “a little hyperbolic.” Still, he confirmed that many career agents were deeply frustrated by how Clinton-related investigations were handled, particularly by the leadership in Washington.
Asked whether James Comey could face criminal charges for leaking or providing false statements, Baker said it’s possible but unlikely. “At this point, the most important thing is to get the facts on the record,” he said. “Let history judge these reckless partisans for the damage they did.”