home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- NATION, Page 50Return of the Watergate Doctrine
-
-
- Reagan claims Executive privilege to shield his diary
-
-
- No man, not even a President, is above the law -- especially
- if he possesses evidence that could affect a fellow citizen's
- fight to stay out of prison. Yet if Presidents can be compelled
- to disclose confidential conversations with their aides,
- perhaps as summed up in a diary, wouldn't that chill the candor
- of future advisers, as well as Presidents? Those conflicting
- points of law, confronted in the doctrine of Executive
- privilege during the Watergate scandal, were raised once again
- last week by Ronald Reagan as he struggled to avoid being
- pulled into the legal battles over the Iran-contra affair that
- had marred his presidency.
-
- Until last week the national furor over the idea of swapping
- weapons for hostages in defiance of a congressional ban on
- official gunrunning to the contras seemed to have faded to the
- vanishing point. But when federal Judge Harold Greene ordered
- that more than 30 excerpts from Reagan's Oval Office diary be
- turned over to his former National Security Adviser John
- Poindexter on the ground that they were relevant to his
- defense, the fuss flared anew, if perhaps only fleetingly.
-
- Reagan's lawyers objected to Greene's order. But only after
- repeated questions from the court did Reagan's attorney
- Theodore Olson even use the words Executive privilege as the
- basis for resisting the order. This defense inevitably raises
- comparisons with Richard Nixon, who failed to persuade the
- Supreme Court that his secret White House recordings merited
- this protection.
-
- In some ways Reagan's position is weaker than Nixon's. Judge
- Greene observed that a former President has less standing to
- claim Executive privilege than the one in office, implying that
- Reagan would have a much stronger case if George Bush joined
- him in asking that the diary excerpts be suppressed. So far,
- Bush has not, and for an obvious reason: it might appear that
- he and Reagan both have something to hide about their
- Iran-contra roles.
-
- Unless the legal bickering over Executive privilege becomes
- protracted, Reagan may face imminent disclosure of his
- mysterious jottings, made in leather-bound notebooks. To date,
- only two of his closest aides have seen the original diary. The
- few attorneys who have examined excerpts say they contain no
- Iran-contra bombshells. But Poindexter, who insisted in Senate
- testimony that "the buck stopped with me" in keeping the
- diversion of arms profits a secret from his boss, hopes the
- diary will show that Reagan gave him at least implicit
- direction to do what he did.
-
- The former President may have more concern about Greene's
- other order: that he give testimony at Poindexter's trial.
- Although, like previous Presidents, he will be quizzed on
- videotape, the examination by Poindexter's lawyers could be
- stiffer than any other probe Reagan has undergone in the whole
- affair. The videotape procedure, agreed to last Friday, makes
- it less likely that Reagan will blurt out some national-security
- secret. If he does, Greene can edit the tape. Still, the
- Justice Department's refusal to permit use of some classified
- documents in the trial could eventually require Greene to
- dismiss the charges against Poindexter, an outcome also
- possible if Reagan wins his fight to withhold the diary. In
- either case, all parties involved in the tangled legal
- situation -- except independent counsel Lawrence Walsh --
- presumably would be pleased.
-
- As it is, Walsh's results, through little fault of his own,
- are meager. He has spent some $18.5 million, and still employs
- 17 full-time attorneys and a staff of 51. Yet unlike Watergate,
- in which 25 individuals went to prison, no one, not even
- Iran-contra's private contractors Richard Secord and Albert
- Hakim and the celebrated Lieut. Colonel Oliver North, has
- served time. In many ways Watergate, a political burglary that
- mushroomed into a massive cover-up, was less serious than the
- deliberate defiance of a congressional law, signed by Reagan,
- and the undermining of a publicly proclaimed policy of never
- bargaining for hostages or selling arms to Iran.
-
- Even North's conviction, Walsh's most spectacular, could
- conceivably be overturned. The retired Marine's attorneys were
- in a federal appeals court last week arguing that his trial was
- unfair, partly because Reagan did not testify. Judge Gerhard
- Gesell ruled that North failed to show how Reagan's testimony
- would be relevant.
-
- The Gipper's words on Iran-contra are suddenly in fresh
- demand for some solid reasons that extend beyond courtrooms.
- They could affect his place in history. Observes Henry Graff,
- a presidential historian at Columbia University: "Reagan can't
- have it both ways. He can't be remembered as a piece of putty
- in the hands of activist conspirators and also someone who put
- his stamp on the times and yearns for a place on Mount
- Rushmore."
-
-
- By Ed Magnuson. Reported by Ted Gup/Washington.
-
-
- ____________________________________________________________ The
- Iran-Contra Heavies: Awaiting History's Judgment
-
- Reagan: He is resisting a court order to produce his diary
- in the Poindexter trial, but he will testify on videotape.
-
- Poindexter: The "buck stopped with me" in congressional
- hearings. Now he hopes Reagan's testimony will help him avoid
- conviction.
-
- North: Fined $150,000 and ordered to perform community
- service, he is appealing his convictions.
-
- Secord: He pleaded guilty to one felony to get eleven other
- charges dismissed. Now he wants his conviction and resulting
- probation overturned.
-
- Hakim: The arms dealer was fined $5,000 for a misdemeanor,
- gave up his claim to $7.3 million in Iran sales profits, but
- might get to keep part of another $1.7 million.
-
-
-
-