Is the FBI sworn to secrecy and not supposed to leak information to the press? Or was that the right thing to do.
Initial reports are that he was pissed off Nixon didn’t promote an internal leader to replace Hoover.
In the end it was the best thing for the country but was he a wistleblower or a distgruntled employee?
Not knowing too much about all the circumstances, I would say that in general, you can’t be asked to keep secrets about illegal actions. Now, there’s always exceptions to the rule, but that would generally cover your ass.
I’m not sure what your point is. He obviously was aware of illegal activities involving the coverup of a crime, and chose to disclose it to Woodward and Bernstein.
Regardless of whether he violated some oath or was a disgruntled employee, he followed his internal moral compass regarding right and wrong, and that should typically be the right thing to do. Or at least one would think. Although today, he would probably labeled a partisan, have himself discredited, or have his information labeled a “viewpoint.”
As for FBI secrecy, I sort of doubt he violated anything, given that it is a law enforcement agency, not a clandestine spy agency. I believe that pursuit of the truth and justice is supposed to be part of their mandate.
Regardless of whether he violated some oath or was a disgruntled employee, he followed his internal moral compass regarding right and wrong, and that should typically be the right thing to do. Or at least one would think. Although today, he would probably labeled a partisan, have himself discredited, or have his information labeled a “viewpoint.”
Give it more than one day, and for all the various sources of opinion to get all riled up.
He obviously leaked information from an active criminal investigation. He broke the law, probably a serious felony.
Whether it was right or wrong, tough call.
I’m not sure what law is being broken here. Exactly what law says that information about active criminal investigations is considered secret or vital to national security? Especially in this context?
This might help you.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/toc.html
I couldn’t find any law prohibiting the disclosure of a facts in a federal criminal investigation. In fact, you only have to read the paper to see that it’s obviously not a crime. It may not be career-enhancing, but I’m pretty sure it’s not a crime, and I can’t remember the last person prosecuted for doing so under any law.
On the other hand, it’s pretty easy to pick out the crimes for which Nixon was guilty.
The only reasons I can think of why he wouldn’t want to do it were the well-earned reputation of the Nixon White House for payback, his career at the FBI, and some loyalty to the chain of command. Fortunately for us, given that the investigation was being stonewalled and people fired, his larger moral view prevented him from just keeping in line.
I am not sure what the crime would be. Maybe something as simple as obstruction of justice. I do remember one of the Watergate figures went to prision for misusing the contents of an FBI file. On Clinton’s watch they improved upon that by a factor of 900 when the Whitehouse wound up with an archive of 900 files they weren’t supposed to have. Supposedly, they never used them.
Do you remember the “Who hired Craig Livingston” scandal? He was the Whitehouse security chief who mishandled the files. He had no security background and everyone denied hiring him. I suggested to a big time Democrat neighbor that he fall on his sword and announce that he had hired Livingston, but Mitch declined for some reason. Livingston was last seen as a limo driver.
Reid recently got into trouble by commenting about one of the filibustered judge’s FBI files that Reid is not even allowed access to by law.
These are internal Justice Department files. Congress can’t even get them via subpoena. Maybe one of the lawyers here can come up with chapter and verse.
This guy got passed over for promotion by Nixon. He was pissed that an outsider was brought into the job. Like everyone else in Washington, he leaked to promote his own agenda, in this case to try to get the top slot. He probably had no idea the thing would snowball as it did. That is how history is made. Unintended consequences.
Right or wrong, you decide. It is way past time to worry about the morality.
I don’t think there is a crime here. It certainly isn’t obstruction of justice, which is rather ironic given that the White House was in fact guilty of that. I don’t understand how leaking the details of a stalled investigation could be perceived as obstruction of justice.
As for Craig Livingston, I don’t remember the name, but I remember the incident. In any case, I don’t recall him being indicted for anything, and while it’s certainly egregious, it certainly isn’t any different than any other administration. At least the Clintons didn’t out a CIA spy as political payback, which if I do recall, is an ongoing criminal investigation. Either way, they shouldn’t have been doing it.
As for Felt being a malcontent, I have no idea. The VF story discusses his relationship with the acting FBI head. But apparently it is utterly inconceivable that he may have actually had a moral quandary and chose to tell the truth. And the fact that everything he said turned out to be absolutely true is apparently besides the point. Evidently, the messenger is so poisoned that the veracity of his statements isn’t meaningful to you.
Art, if I recall correctly, you were more than happy to consider SBVT as a bunch of courageous veterans standing up for truth, despite the obvious holes in their testimony, the fact that all the documentary evidence was against them, and the fact the Navy itself said Kerry served with honor. But of course they’re courageous truthtellers while Felt is a malcontent out to get somebody.
Reading your posts is quite puzzling, Art. You seem to have absolutely no recognition of the fact that your partisanship is so clearly apparent. And by partisanship, you seem to care much more about who is saying/doing something, rather than what it is they are saying/doing. And I think this is unfortunate.
I mean Art, it’s amazing to me you that even think there is still a question as to right or wrong. The White House conspired to burglarize and surveil a political opponent, and then conspired to cover it up, and then obstructed justice. What part of that is open to an ethical debate?
I never offered an opinion one way or the other about what Felt did was “right.” I am pretty certain it was a felony. I don’t remember which Whitewater person went to jail over the FBI file anymore, though I wish I did. There was serious discussion of bringing criminal charges in the case of the 900 FBI files.
I never characterized Felt as a malcontent. I never argued with the veracity of his statements. The Watergate investigation was not stalled when Felt started leaking. I never suggested Felt didn’t have a moral quandry, and I never suggested Felt was out to get anyone, except for his new boss who he certainly was out to get.
Other than that, excellent summary of my points.
I should have asked earlier. Before you bestow sainthood on the guy, you do know that he is a convicted felon for his role in break-ins of his own, don’t you?
I was wrong, it wasn’t even necessary to wait overnight for any “he was a hero” / “he was a traitor” banter, that’s well underway.
Regardless of whether he violated some oath or was a disgruntled employee, he followed his internal moral compass regarding right and wrong, and that should typically be the right thing to do. Or at least one would think. Although today, he would probably labeled a partisan, have himself discredited, or have his information labeled a “viewpoint.”
Give it more than one day, and for all the various sources of opinion to get all riled up.
Too late. Pat Buchanan already labeled him a “traitor”.
I never offered an opinion one way or the other about what Felt did was “right.” I am pretty certain it was a felony
You’re pretty sure it was a felony, although you yourself admit you dont even know what the crime would be. You do seem pretty sure of things when they fit your partisan view of the world, facts be damned.
I am not a lawyer and don’t know the exact crime, but Chuck Colson went to jail for seven months for improper use of an FBI file.
I don’t know what this has to do with a partisan view of anything. Isn’t Felt the kind of guy you are supposed to hate? He rose under J. Edgar Hoover to the number two man at the FBI. He did break-ins himself. He was convicted of that.
Had he been named FBI director instead of the outsider, you never would have heard of Woodward and Bernstein.
Why is it so difficult to acknowledge that he gets mixed grades? Not a hero, not a traitor, just an ambitious guy making the best decisions he could for his own interests, the FBI and his country.
Apparently you’re talking about Felt’s conviction for COINTELPRO abuses regarding the Black Panthers. Fancy you siding with the Panthers. As far as I can tell, that was not a partisan political matter.
As for your speculation that Deep Throat wouldn’t have existed if Felt was named director, perhaps that is true, but you simply have no idea. If you’re arguing that the investigation would have gone full-scale because of fewer institutional barriers in front of a director, I’m inclined to agree. If you’re arguing that he would have simply dropped it in the name of career expediency, given the risks he took, and the fact that he was investigating this aggressively beforehand, I think you’re speculating out of your ass.
Why is it so difficult to acknowledge that he gets mixed grades? Not a hero, not a traitor, just an ambitious guy making the best decisions he could for his own interests, the FBI and his country.
I can go with that, but before you call him a felon, you’re going to have to do a little better job backing that up. “Someone else was convicted for improper handling of an FBI file” is pretty vague and unconvincing.
Generally, I dislike anonymous sources, and Deep Throat was the granddaddy of them all. Personally, I’d have warmer feelings for Felt if he had had enough courage to blow the lid off out in the open.
Funny, this morning on Good Morning America or Today, I forget which, I saw Pat Buchannan and another former employee of the Nixon camp blasting the guy for leaking the information. The gist of it was that he was traitor of Nixon and the country because it "flushed the work they had done in Vietnam War down the sewer." Oddly, they gave the impression that he was more of an evil man because he betrayed Nixon.
He may or may not have had the best of motives and how he leaked the information may or may not have been illegal, but it seems like something that needed to be done. Maybe I am too skeptical of government but even if there was an investigation already in progress...would it ever have been really seen the light of day? Maybe, maybe not.
I am glad that he blew the whistle...this isn't a partisan issue to me, I have had no problem all the times democrats have been investigated as well. If your doing something wrong, whether its lying to the public about getting a BJ in the oval office, travelgate, or watergate, it doesn't matter which side they are on, it should be both investigated and brought to the public. Both sides do stuff wrong but it doesn't make it right.
Actually, I think it was the Weathermen or something like that, but the memory is vague.
Do you actually read what I write? Where do you get anything resembling my siding with the Black Panthers or whoever?
I do grant that it was silly for Felt to individually take a fall for what had been a common FBI practice. Reagan’s pardon seemed appropriate.
Sorry, not buying Felt was outraged that the Whitehouse would do a break-in a couple years after he did all his break-ins. I do buy he was pissed at Whitehouse interference in the investigation of Watergate.
I also think it is unlikely that absent Deep Throat the investigation would have died. My memory says the real break came when the judge (Sirica?) squeezed one of the Watergate burglers with the threat of serious prison. I think Watergate was mostly the result of good work by the official government agencies. Obviously, we will never know.
While I am at it, where do you get the idea that I think Felt would have dropped the Watergate investigation had he been chief? In the Hoover and post Hoover years, the FBI was not in the habit of taking crap from anyone, including the Whitehouse. Felt would have pursued the investigation, probably pretty intelligently, he just wouldn’t have been leaking to submarine an unwanted boss.
It is my understanding that any FBI investigation documents (form 302?) are classified and that any government employee with a security clearance takes an oath to not divulge the information. Breaking that oath is a felony. I just don’t know what felony.
A little homework shows that Chuck Colson plead guilty to misusing one FBI file and got seven months in jail as a plea.
If Felt wanted to be a hero, he should have quit and publicly blown the whistle and risked taking the fall. Plenty of people go that route, but it takes serious guts. He was not interested in being a hero, and I don’t blame him for that.