ADVERTISEMENT

I Headed the F.B.I. and C.I.A. There’s a Dire Threat to the Country I Love.

Stevie_H

All World
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
5,308
2,841
113
I Headed the F.B.I. and C.I.A. There’s a Dire Threat to the Country I Love.
By William Webster

Dec. 16, 2019
The rule of law is the principle that protects every American from the abuse of monarchs, despots and tyrants.

merlin_163910355_fa50244e-1882-4add-bad1-ea314264bba0-articleLarge.jpg

Christopher Wray, the director of the F.B.I., speaking at the Department of Justice in Washington in July.Saul Loeb/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
The privilege of being the only American in our history to serve as the director of both the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. gives me a unique perspective and a responsibility to speak out about a dire threat to the rule of law in the country I love. Order protects liberty, and liberty protects order. Today, the integrity of the institutions that protect our civil order is, tragically, under assault from too many people whose job it should be to protect them.

The rule of law is the bedrock of American democracy, the principle that protects every American from the abuse of monarchs, despots and tyrants. Every American should demand that our leaders put the rule of law above politics.

I am deeply disturbed by the assertion of President Trump that our “current director” — as he refers to the man he selected for the job of running the F.B.I. — cannot fix what the president calls a broken agency. The 10-year term given to all directors following J. Edgar Hoover’s 48-year tenure was created to provide independence for the director and for the bureau. The president’s thinly veiled suggestion that the director, Christopher Wray, like his banished predecessor, James Comey, could be on the chopping block, disturbs me greatly. The independence of both the F.B.I. and its director is critical and should be fiercely protected by each branch of government.

Over my nine-plus years as F.B.I. director, I reported to four honorable attorneys general. Each clearly understood the importance of the rule of law in our democracy and the critical role the F.B.I. plays in the enforcement of our laws. They fought to protect both, knowing how important it was that our F.B.I. remain independent of political influence of any kind.

As F.B.I. director, I served two presidents, one a Democrat, Jimmy Carter, who selected me in part because I was a Republican, and one a Republican, Ronald Reagan, whom I revered. Both of these presidents so respected the bureau’s independence that they went out of their way not to interfere with or sway our activities. I never once felt political pressure.

I know firsthand the professionalism of the men and women of the F.B.I. The aspersions cast upon them by the president and my longtime friend, Attorney General William P. Barr, are troubling in the extreme. Calling F.B.I. professionals “scum,” as the president did, is a slur against people who risk their lives to keep us safe. Mr. Barr’s charges of bias within the F.B.I., made without providing any evidence and in direct dispute of the findings of the nonpartisan inspector general, risk inflicting enduring damage on this critically important institution.

The country can ill afford to have a chief law enforcement officer dispute the Justice Department’s own independent inspector general’s report and claim that an F.B.I. investigation was based on “a completely bogus narrative.” In fact, the report conclusively found that the evidence to initiate the Russia investigation was unassailable. There were more than 100 contacts between members of the Trump campaign and Russian agents during the 2016 campaign, and Russian efforts to undermine our democracy continue to this day. I’m glad the F.B.I. took the threat seriously. It is important, Mr. Wray said last week, that the inspector general found that “the investigation was opened with appropriate predication and authorization.”

As a lawyer and a former federal judge, I made it clear when I headed both the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. that the rule of law would be paramount in all we did. While both agencies are staffed by imperfect human beings, the American people should understand that both agencies are composed of some of the most law-abiding, patriotic and dedicated people I have ever met. While their faces and actions are not seen by most Americans, rest assured that they are serving our country well.

I have complete confidence in Mr. Wray, and I know that the F.B.I. is not a broken institution. It is a professional agency worthy of respect and support. The derision and aspersions are dangerous and unwarranted.

I’m profoundly disappointed in another longtime, respected friend, Rudy Giuliani, who had spent his life defending our people from those who would do us harm. His activities of late concerning Ukraine have, at a minimum, failed the smell test of propriety. I hope he, like all of us, will redirect to our North Star, the rule of law, something so precious it is greater than any man or administration.

This difficult moment demands the restoration of the proper place of the Department of Justice and the F.B.I. as bulwarks of law and order in America. This is not about politics. This is about the rule of law. Republicans and Democrats alike should defend it above all else.

In my nearly 96 years, I have seen our country rise above extraordinary challenges — the Great Depression, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, segregation, assassinations, the resignation of a president and 9/11, to name just a few.

I continue to believe in and pray for the ability of all Americans to overcome our differences and pursue the common good. Order protects liberty, and liberty protects order.

William Webster, a former federal judge, was director of the F.B.I. from 1978 to 1987, and director of the C.I.A. from 1987 to 1991.
 
A former CIA director talking about the "rule of law" is rich.

If Webster is so concerned, why doesn't he go and talk to his "longtime friend," Barr?

This president was elected to shake up the DC establishment. He has done just that, although I don't agree with the way he has gone about it. He just couldn't help himself when it comes to enriching himself in the process. None of this should be surprising. The voters will decide in 11 months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HALL85
This president was elected to shake up the DC establishment. He has done just that

In a gas-lighting, burn it down and ignore any potential damage to the county kind of way, sure.


The voters will decide in 11 months.

We all know he doesn’t care about corruption. He just wanted to put a cloud over an opponent with the help of a foreign government. If he gets away with it, why wouldn’t he do it again or possibly something worse?

Impeachable conduct when we are 3 years out from an election shouldn't be different than impeachable conduct a year and a half from an election or 6 months from an election.

I still would not vote to convict him at this point, and I would stay there if we do not see any additional evidence but I do believe we still need to hear from Bolton and Mulvaney under oath before making that decision.

Hopefully there are 4 republican senators who want to hear from them as well.
 
A former CIA director talking about the "rule of law" is rich.

If Webster is so concerned, why doesn't he go and talk to his "longtime friend," Barr?

This president was elected to shake up the DC establishment. He has done just that, although I don't agree with the way he has gone about it. He just couldn't help himself when it comes to enriching himself in the process. None of this should be surprising. The voters will decide in 11 months.
Interesting focus group conducted in Michigan, that provides some insight as to the "why" of Trumps support from Obama voters that voted for Trump in 2016. Clear to see the impeachment process is purely political since the reasons for support in a swing state would be deeply concerning to Democrats. As you indicated, instead of penning an opinion piece, if he was so concerned about the country, go to Barr and others and make your case.

https://www.axios.com/focus-group-m...ent-183e4fc7-5ecc-41bd-add1-537ed8a2fd8f.html

Some of the comments in the focus group sum up a lot of what I hear from those in the community that I work here in eastern PA.
 
Woof this is a bad take...

A former CIA director talking about the "rule of law" is rich.

Lawyer. Federal Judge. Served as Director of CIA and FBI under multiple administrations and parties. 96 years old. That's a unique perspective on law, government, recent US history, and their intersection. That can't be swept away by a careless statement on a message board. I'll go with his perspective and measured, rational words over ready-fire-aim statements.


If Webster is so concerned, why doesn't he go and talk to his "longtime friend," Barr?

How do we know he hasn't? It really wouldn't matter anyway. Barr has shown himself to be nothing more than another Trump lackey, throwing away a solid career record to play the role of a hack PR man for one more sniff of the throne. His attempts to mischaracterize the findings of the Mueller report and more recently disagreeing with the findings of his Justice Department and own hand-picked IG's investigation findings are transparent to anyone with a brain. He is an embarrassment.

This president was elected to shake up the DC establishment. He has done just that, although I don't agree with the way he has gone about it.

He was elected to serve as President of the United States, under an oath. There are various reasons why people voted for him. His drain the swamp campaign promise was simply one of them. To say that's why he was elected is incomplete at best. At least he followed through. He drained the swamp and pumped in raw sewage and toxic waste.

He just couldn't help himself when it comes to enriching himself in the process. None of this should be surprising. The voters will decide in 11 months.

We elected a clown so don't be surprised by the circus isn't an acceptable defense. 'He just can't help himself' soft-pedals the seriousness of his conduct and the seriousness of the situation the nation currently faces.


Speaking to a general audience, not just to you now:

All of this goes beyond the pathetic and disturbing political polarization of the day. This is a simple yes or no concept. You either stand with a republic guided by the rule of law or you don't. There are no acceptable arguments for allowing Trump to continue to serve. No but muh judges. No but my taxes. No but the socialists. No let the election decide. It's well beyond time to stow the bad faith and intellectually dishonest arguments. Save the whatabouts, media complaints, and conspiracy theories. Send the army of strawmen home. There is no defense for supporting (by any means, including silence) what we are witnessing. None.


 
  • Like
Reactions: donnie_baseball
Woof this is a bad take...


Lawyer. Federal Judge. Served as Director of CIA and FBI under multiple administrations and parties. 96 years old. That's a unique perspective on law, government, recent US history, and their intersection. That can't be swept away by a careless statement on a message board. I'll go with his perspective and measured, rational words over ready-fire-aim statements.

Barr has shown himself to be nothing more than another Trump lackey, throwing away a solid career record to play the role of a hack PR man for one more sniff of the throne. His attempts to mischaracterize the findings of the Mueller report and more recently disagreeing with the findings of his Justice Department and own hand-picked IG's investigation findings are transparent to anyone with a brain. He is an embarrassment.
So two public servants that have long, respected and storied careers....one you characterize as having perspective, measure and rational and one you call an embarrassment. No partisanship there???

The rest is a rant of someone that was unhappy with Trump being elected in the first place. In the meantime Congress continues to vacate their jobs as legislators. But I'm sure you're fine with that.
https://www.axios.com/government-fu...xes-ce13c0af-15d8-4e54-8210-296afa68e9b0.html
 
Interesting focus group conducted in Michigan, that provides some insight as to the "why" of Trumps support from Obama voters that voted for Trump in 2016. Clear to see the impeachment process is purely political since the reasons for support in a swing state would be deeply concerning to Democrats. As you indicated, instead of penning an opinion piece, if he was so concerned about the country, go to Barr and others and make your case.

https://www.axios.com/focus-group-m...ent-183e4fc7-5ecc-41bd-add1-537ed8a2fd8f.html

Some of the comments in the focus group sum up a lot of what I hear from those in the community that I work here in eastern PA.

Yep, the politics of impeachment are not good for democrats. That doesn’t mean they should ignore Trump abusing the power of the office for personal gain...
 
Yep, the politics of impeachment are not good for democrats. That doesn’t mean they should ignore Trump abusing the power of the office for personal gain...
Wash, rinse, repeat....
 
So two public servants that have long, respected and storied careers....one you characterize as having perspective, measure and rational and one you call an embarrassment. No partisanship there???

You’re cool the the AG coming out and criticizing the IG report?
 
Woof this is a bad take...


Lawyer. Federal Judge. Served as Director of CIA and FBI under multiple administrations and parties. 96 years old. That's a unique perspective on law, government, recent US history, and their intersection. That can't be swept away by a careless statement on a message board. I'll go with his perspective and measured, rational words over ready-fire-aim statements.




How do we know he hasn't? It really wouldn't matter anyway. Barr has shown himself to be nothing more than another Trump lackey, throwing away a solid career record to play the role of a hack PR man for one more sniff of the throne. His attempts to mischaracterize the findings of the Mueller report and more recently disagreeing with the findings of his Justice Department and own hand-picked IG's investigation findings are transparent to anyone with a brain. He is an embarrassment.



He was elected to serve as President of the United States, under an oath. There are various reasons why people voted for him. His drain the swamp campaign promise was simply one of them. To say that's why he was elected is incomplete at best. At least he followed through. He drained the swamp and pumped in raw sewage and toxic waste.



We elected a clown so don't be surprised by the circus isn't an acceptable defense. 'He just can't help himself' soft-pedals the seriousness of his conduct and the seriousness of the situation the nation currently faces.


Speaking to a general audience, not just to you now:

All of this goes beyond the pathetic and disturbing political polarization of the day. This is a simple yes or no concept. You either stand with a republic guided by the rule of law or you don't. There are no acceptable arguments for allowing Trump to continue to serve. No but muh judges. No but my taxes. No but the socialists. No let the election decide. It's well beyond time to stow the bad faith and intellectually dishonest arguments. Save the whatabouts, media complaints, and conspiracy theories. Send the army of strawmen home. There is no defense for supporting (by any means, including silence) what we are witnessing. None.



Read some history on the CIA. An organization with no regard for the rule of law given the dirty tricks (and worse) they have done over the years.
 
So two public servants that have long, respected and storied careers....one you characterize as having perspective, measure and rational and one you call an embarrassment. No partisanship there???

That's correct. If were talking political partisanship, they're both republicans. The conduct of these men is what dictates the characterization. It's right in front of us. Show me the political hack routine by Webster. You can't, because there isn't one. Now Bill Barr...? Mischaracterizes the findings of the Mueller report prior to release of the full report. That happened and it's painfully clear what he was attempting to do. Currently, he's engaged in revisionist campaign to undermine a thorough, two-year IG investigation, by substituting partisan rhetoric for politically inconvenient facts. That is happening, once again, right in front of us all. He's not the first AG to play the role of President's protector, just the latest.

The rest is a rant of someone that was unhappy with Trump being elected in the first place. In the meantime Congress continues to vacate their jobs as legislators. But I'm sure you're fine with that.
https://www.axios.com/government-funding-bill-affordable-care-act-taxes-ce13c0af-15d8-4e54-8210-296afa68e9b0.html

The rest is a weak framing followed by deflection, which is typical.
 
He's not the first AG to play the role of President's protector, just the latest.
That sentence I agree with. Everything else is your partisan opinion. You probably thought Comey was a good guy when he suited your position as well.
 
Read some history on the CIA. An organization with no regard for the rule of law given the dirty tricks (and worse) they have done over the years.

I am familiar enough. The fact the CIA has incurred black eyes doesn't invalidate the man's words.
 
That sentence I agree with. Everything else is your partisan opinion. You probably thought Comey was a good guy when he suited your position as well.

More lousy framing. Prove any of that.
 
My take is Webster is an experienced, honorable guy who did in fact serve honorable Presidents and his opinion carries weight and should be listened to. I'm not happy that Trump and his minions had so many interactions with the Russians and pressed the Ukraine to investigate Biden. Proven or not something smells and at minimum it's clearly not right. I wasn't happy when we sold uranium to the Russians or sent billions on a plane in cash in the middle of the night to the Iranians to pay them back. Different Presidents, different examples, but it all smells bad to me as a citizen of the US and we should not accept it no matter what party we feel closer to or whose President did it. Presidents and politicians have too much power.

Unfortunately the political climate is so toxic and absurd right now Webster may not be able to relate to how things are today. When he was in charge of the CIA and FBI things were working a little better than today IMO politically. It wasn't a travesty to go to lunch or dinner with members of the other party to discuss getting things done. Senators and congress people did not have to worry that someone would take a pic and post it on Twitter and they would have to defend talking to the enemy. And you didn't have a President tweeting all the time attacking anyone that disagrees with him.

Our country needs leadership from our Presidents and Congress and Senate to get back on reasonable footing. That will probably not happen anytime soon.

IMO we need term limits in place so maybe more politicians will be there to govern and get things done instead of just getting reelected and lining their pockets and attacking the other party. Webster makes a lot of good points in my opinion and maybe his wisdom of working together and protecting some of our institutions or at least trying to make them better should be listened to. No matter where you stand, maybe he operated in a better, more reasonable political time and we should try and get back there and that is the bigger message.
His closing lines are pretty strong...

"I continue to believe in and pray for the ability of all Americans to overcome our differences and pursue the common good. Order protects liberty, and liberty protects order."
 
  • Like
Reactions: shu09 and HALL85
Go back and re-read my post. You interpreted what two people said and described them to fit your partisan opinion and narrative.

So we're back to this. Specifically, how is that partisan? Specifically. It's a simple specific question that should have a simple specific answer.
 
So we're back to this. Specifically, how is that partisan? Specifically. It's a simple specific question that should have a simple specific answer.
I’ve already answered the question.
 
Not with any substance, just a jumble of words. I wasn't expecting any better.
Do you need to practice being a dick or does it come natural? How about this? My position is consistent with much of what Section112 and shu09 have stated. So now you can cease with the jack-off posts.
 
Do you need to practice being a dick or does it come natural? How about this? My position is consistent with much of what Section112 and shu09 have stated. So now you can cease with the jack-off posts.

You called me partisan and couldn’t articulate a sound rationale. No need to get all pissy. That too is expected though.
 
Go back and re-read my post. You interpreted what two people said and described them to fit your partisan opinion and narrative.

I mean, you called him partisan without any understanding of his criticism of Barr.

You leave any possibility that the criticism is valid.
 
You called me partisan and couldn’t articulate a sound rationale. No need to get all pissy. That too is expected though.
I explained my position. I can’t help it if you’re reading comprehension sucks.
 
Lol...you’re the one suffering from TDS. Textbook.

Chill out and Merry Christmas!

I’m more than comfortable being opposed to Trump. He’s bad for our country, period. I’ll be on the right side of history. It's an easy call frankly. And a Happy New Year to you closet Trump fanboy!
 
I’m more than comfortable being opposed to Trump. He’s bad for our country, period. I’ll be on the right side of history. It's an easy call frankly. And a Happy New Year to you closet Trump fanboy!
Textbook TDS...terminal actually
 
You have nothing of substance. Cheap taunts. And you keep coming back. So thirsty for it. Can’t help yourself. Like a toddler.
I think we were done a long time ago, but your TDS comes shining through with each rant. Go ahead and have the last word...you know you have to.
 
I think we were done a long time ago, but your TDS comes shining through with each rant. Go ahead and have the last word...you know you have to.


Thank you. Since I started this thread and you derailed it with petty sniping, it’s only fitting I have the last word. Be better than this next time. If you want to accuse me of something, be able to back it up or kindly shut up. Merry Christmas to you and yours.
 
Thank you. Since I started this thread and you derailed it with petty sniping, it’s only fitting I have the last word. Be better than this next time. If you want to accuse me of something, be able to back it up or kindly shut up. Merry Christmas to you and yours.
SMH
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT