Sometimes the CIA has to work with bad people to get the bigger fish, like helping to take down a hostile government. That's part of their job.
That may be part of their job, but morally this isn't justifiable. If a government is hostile to the USA, it doesn't mean it's "bad" by default and has to be taken down. By that logic, we can also say the mafia is doing their job too, because it's their life and traditions; the only thing that differentiates them from the secret services like the CIA is that they are not "official", but so what?
Ross says that because the CIA looked the other way while Blandon sold cocaine that they are responsible. But working with a drug trafficker does not mean that the CIA approved of what he was doing.
No one in the CIA sold drugs, but a couple people working with the CIA did. So the claim is guilt by association, which is a logical fallacy.
How can you be so sure the CIA didn't sell drugs? I thought it was pretty common knowledge that the secret services of all the countries commit crimes from time to time, sometimes out of the hypocritical reason of "strengthening their nation" and sometimes just to fill their pockets. Why should the CIA be an exception? I never thought anyone in this world seriously believed in the honesty of such institutions like the secret services, especially ones like the CIA that have much to do with politics, espionage and counter-espionage. Such things always depend from a point of view, because politicians and governments considered "bad" by the CIA may be considered at least "not so bad" by somebody else. Some people think the USA are "bad" and only aim at the world supremacy, but this imo is as much an exaggerated view as the view of the ones who support the CIA and the idea that all enemies of the USA have to be eliminated.
Don't know much about Gary Webb, but his articles about the alleged release of drug lord Carlos Lehder seemed pretty convincing to me. How do you know he really killed himself?
