Advertisement

THE NORTH VERDICT : Next Trial May Target Reagan, Bush : Poindexter Case Could Focus on Their Iran-Contra Involvement

Share
Times Staff Writers

Hanging over the Oliver L. North trial from start to finish was a question that transcended the fate of one previously obscure Marine officer: How closely involved in the Iran-Contra affair were then-President Ronald Reagan and now-President Bush?

Those questions still could grow into full-scale legal migraines for the former President and his successor when the next major Iran-Contra figure--former National Security Adviser John M. Poindexter--goes on trial.

Bush and Reagan escaped with relatively minor headaches at North’s trial, despite revelations that they knew more than they have acknowledged publicly about his efforts to aid Nicaragua’s rebels. By contrast, Poindexter’s trial, now expected to begin in the fall, could cause Bush and Reagan serious political embarrassment and possibly even involve them legally.

Advertisement

Main Charges

That is because Lawrence E. Walsh, the Iran-Contra prosecutor, disclosed recently that he still hopes to try Poindexter on the main conspiracy and theft counts stemming from the secret diversion to the Contras of profits from U.S. arms sales to Iran.

North was indicted on those charges but not tried on them. Walsh agreed to drop the two counts after Atty. Gen. Dick Thornburgh, speaking on behalf of the government’s intelligence agencies, said that a trial involving those counts inevitably would expose government secrets.

There is reason to believe that Thornburgh might not make the same objection to trying Poindexter on these charges. In a pretrial hearing for Poindexter, Walsh told U.S. District Judge Aubrey Robinson that there has been “a softening to some degree in the position of the intelligence agencies” on the classified documents related to the counts.

Trying Poindexter on the two conspiracy and theft counts could open the most sensitive aspect of the Iran-Contra affair to microscopic courtroom examination for the first time.

Even in the North trial, defense attorneys were able to obtain documents about Bush and Reagan that had eluded congressional investigators. The Poindexter case could spawn more new information about whether Reagan and Bush knew anything about the diversion of Iran arms-sale profits to the Contras.

Poindexter also presents a potentially more serious problem for Reagan and Bush because he--unlike North--was in almost daily contact with both men for the three years when the secret operations in Iran and Nicaragua were carried out.

Advertisement

As Reagan’s national security adviser from Dec. 4, 1985, until Nov. 25, 1986, Poindexter normally gave the President his daily national security briefings--meetings in which the efforts to supply the Contras and free the U.S. hostages in Beirut were discussed frequently, according to Poindexter’s congressional testimony.

And as deputy national security adviser from 1983 through 1985, Poindexter sat in on many such briefings as well. Bush, who was vice president at the time, also attended many of the morning security briefings.

Bush Question

So Poindexter is in a position to answer a question that the congressional committees never posed: Did George Bush know the details of the secret arms sales to Iran?

Bush has said that he knew about the deals only in a general way and that he did not learn they were aimed primarily at winning the release of the hostages until a senator told him so in December, 1986, after the Iranian initiative became public knowledge.

Poindexter also may be able to shed light on how much Bush knew of the National Security Council’s secret operations to obtain foreign aid for the Contras. Bush has refused to comment on that issue other than to deny that he discussed a quid pro quo for aid with the president of Honduras in 1985.

Poindexter’s notes from the briefings, most of which have not been made public, also could provide evidence of what Bush and Reagan knew.

Objections Told

For example, Poindexter’s handwritten agenda for the President’s national security briefing on Jan. 17, 1986, notes that he planned to brief Reagan and Bush about a proposed Iranian arms deal. One point on the agenda read: “(Secretary of State George P.) Shultz & (Secretary of Defense Caspar W.) Weinberger still recommend against.” Bush has insisted that he never knew Shultz and Weinberger objected to the deal.

Advertisement

Poindexter, in his congressional testimony, said that he made the decision himself to approve the diversion of the arms-sale proceeds to the Contras but that he was confident it was within the scope of policies that Reagan already had authorized.

“On this whole issue, you know, the buck stops here with me,” Poindexter testified. “I made the decision. I felt that I had the authority to do it. . . . I was convinced that the President would in the end think it was a good idea. But I did not want him associated with the decision.”

Briefed President

Poindexter also testified that Reagan knew of most of his and North’s operations. “I briefed the President on ‘most all aspects of all the projects that Col. North was involved with,” he said.

If Poindexter sticks with this stance at the trial, it could form the basis for an “assumed authority” defense--that he had reason to assume he had authority for his actions. Any such defense is likely to lead to renewed efforts for testimony from Reagan and Bush. U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell turned down defense requests to subpoena them in North’s case on grounds that North had shown no evidence that either man was necessary for his defense.

In Poindexter’s case, the defendant had much more direct contact with the two chief executives than North, and Judge Robinson could take a different view than Gesell.

There were other potential problems for Bush and Reagan presented by Poindexter’s July 15-21, 1987, testimony before the congressional committees:

Advertisement

--Poindexter said that he never told Reagan about the diversion. White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater responded that Poindexter had done a disservice to Reagan by not informing him of the diversion.

Poindexter then said: “I would have expected him to say that. That is the whole idea of deniability.” To some, the remark suggested that Poindexter believed Fitzwater was carrying out a deniability scheme.

--Poindexter said that Reagan knew of some of North’s Contra activities, a remark that could extend to Bush as well.

--Poindexter testified that Reagan signed a December, 1985, order that retroactively approved a straight arms-for-hostage swap. Reagan initially denied signing any such order but changed his story after Poindexter testified.

--According to documents released in the North trial, Poindexter suggested that Bush get involved in the effort to persuade Honduras to help the Contras by accelerating U.S. aid to the Central American country. Other officials, however, have said that when Bush subsequently met with Honduran President Roberto Suazo Cordoba, he did not discuss a direct quid pro quo.

--Poindexter said that he had Reagan’s approval in October, 1986, for a nine-point plan that included the sale of 500 TOW missiles to Iran in exchange for the release of David P. Jacobsen, one of the U.S. hostages in Lebanon. The plan also included a scheme for the release of the 17 Dawa terrorists in Kuwait. The congressional committees never determined whether Bush knew about the plan.

Advertisement

Could Not Recall

Part of the problem was--and may continue to be--Poindexter’s feebleness of memory. In five days of congressional testimony, he said that he did not recall information 184 times.

North’s conviction presents Poindexter with a major problem because of the possibility that North could be forced to testify against the former national security adviser.

If North appeals his conviction, which is regarded as virtually certain, the prosecutors would be taking something of a risk to immunize him against prosecution to compel his testimony in a Poindexter trial. The risk is that if North’s appeal succeeds, any newly conferred immunity might complicate a retrial.

But that is a risk that prosecutors might be willing to take to bring out the fuller story in a trial of the main conspiracy charge against Poindexter.

Advertisement