View From the Past

Could it be a bad joke? Nope, there on our television screens was Richard Nixon, dispensing legal advice about pardons, of all things, to the man who now sits in the office he once disgraced. Having heard him out, it’s clear to us that having a presidential pardon yourself doesn’t make you an expert on presidential pardons.

If President Reagan believes that his former aides, John M. Poindexter and Oliver L. North, had his approval or were acting in his interests in the Iran-Contra affair, then, Nixon said, Reagan “would have a good case for pardoning” them because “the so-called crime would lack an intent.” After all, he added, there had been no “personal gain” for North and Poindexter in what the independent counsel has charged was a conspiracy to defraud the United States. Nixon might be wise to review what his law books say about intent--it isn’t interchangeable with criminal motive or personal gain--or, better yet, he should keep these thoughts to himself.

Every time Nixon grants an interview or makes a speech, we’re reminded of what a master strategist he is, just how impressive is his grasp of global issues and world personalities--and what a moral vacuum there is inside him. He admitted, somewhat grudgingly, to the NBC-TV interviewers that the Watergate cover-up was “wrong” but at the same time he expressed regret that he hadn’t pardoned his White House aides, H.R. Haldeman and John D. Ehrlichman, before they went to trial. If the cover-up itself was wrong, wouldn’t it have been equally wrong to have let its perpetrators off scot-free?

Nixon himself is the strongest argument against pretrial pardons. He escaped impeachment and trial by resigning before Congress could move against him; former President Gerald R. Ford’s blanket pardon a month later preempted any grand jury indictment. The country never got a final, official accounting of the wrongs Nixon committed. Thus to this day, die-hard Nixon supporters can insist that the 37th President of the United States, despite obstructing investigations, concealing evidence and paying off witnesses, did nothing other Presidents had not done.

It is unlikely that Poindexter and North can be tried before Reagan leaves office, and for Reagan to pardon them in advance would short-circuit the judicial process and deny the country yet another final accounting. Years from now, Americans would still be debating whether Ollie really did anything wrong; that is an issue that should be decided by a jury, not debated in barrooms.