Why do people care what label Mark Felt gets from history?
Go ahead, make him the "villain". Question his motives. Say he was bitter, jealous, vindictive, a cannibal, whatever you want.
It doesn't change ANYTHING: Richard Nixon broke the law and his oath of office, and resigned because it was true and it was provable. He didn't want to be impeached, convicted and thrown out of office (or into jail). That won't be changed, and an honest American history gives him the finger; anyone who thinks he wasn't a disgrace isn't a fan of the Constitution or laws, plain and simple.
Ben Stein, Pat Buchanan and the other Nixon-loving dinosaurs will go to their mercifully near graves believing either that Nixon was a wonderful man and president whose crimes were worth overlooking, or that his crimes were less consequential than those committed by other presidents, i.e. "they're all crooks".
That is an attempt to censor history, and an attempt to excuse any behavior of the current administration as par for the course. Nixon-excusers expect, and in many cases demand, nothing less from their government: Nixon-lovers and W-lovers share the need for a leader who doesn't acknowledge rules. Rules are for the other guy.
Nixon ushered in the modern Pox Americana, and W is just the latest iteration of those who feel that winning is more important than any law that might get in the way of being perceived as the winner.
Mark Felt blew the whistle and revealed Nixons lies and crimes. I don't know who the hell he was otherwise, but don't blame Felt for telling the truth. Remember the truth, Watergate-deniers?
No matter what Felt was or did, no matter whether Colson, or Liddy or any of the others were more or less honorable than Felt, before, during or after...
Felt told the truth.
Nixon was a crook.
Fact.
