The idea that Mark Felt was mainly driven by moral considerations about Nixon’s failings seems strange given how Mark Felt himself was responsible for highly illegal operations like COINTELPRO.
Perhaps there’s some critical difference between the kind of criminal activity inherent in things like COINTELPRO, or NSA surveillance, and the kind of criminal activity inherent in what Nixon did, and that that difference would also apply to covering up Epstein’s murder. The existence of such a distinction between agency-wide abuses of power that plausibly have some relation to its charter, and explicitly self-serving corruption on behalf of individual political appointees, would also explain why Mark Felt did what he did in lieu of another explanation like “Nixon asked for files from the Kennedy assasination.”
Perhaps there’s some critical difference between the kind of criminal activity inherent in things like COINTELPRO, or NSA surveillance, and the kind of criminal activity inherent in what Nixon did, and that that difference would also apply to covering up Epstein’s murder. The existence of such a distinction between agency-wide abuses of power that plausibly have some relation to its charter, and explicitly self-serving corruption on behalf of individual political appointees, would also explain why Mark Felt did what he did in lieu of another explanation like “Nixon asked for files from the Kennedy assasination.”