Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, February 9, 1993 TAG: 9302090206
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: The Washington Post
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Long
WALSH PRESENTS NEW EVIDENCE OF IRAN-CONTRA COVERUP
Independent counsel Lawrence Walsh on Monday laid out "new and disturbing facts" that he said showed top government officials lied about President Ronald Reagan's knowledge of a possibly illegal arms-for-hostages shipment to Iran in November 1985.In a report to Congress, Walsh made public much of the documentary evidence that he said he would have used at the trial of former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, whom then-President George Bush pardoned Dec. 24.
Citing notes written by Weinberger and a top aide to former Secretary of State George Shultz, Walsh said Weinberger "opposed disclosing the arms sales to the public and acquiesced as other administration officials provided information to members of Congress and to the public that Weinberger knew to be false."
The independent counsel described a series of White House meetings in November 1986, when the secret deals with Iran were becoming public, at which Reagan's aides were trying to cover up the president's approval of the November 1985 shipment of Hawk missiles to Iran. This was a particular concern because the shipment had been carried out with the aid of the CIA without formal presidential authorization and in apparent violation of the Arms Export Control Act.
Making the situation more difficult, Reagan had by then twice publicly stated that no laws had been broken in the course of the arms deals.
Walsh said that at the first White House briefing for congressional leaders on the arms deals, then national security adviser John Poindexter falsely stated that here had been no transfer of arms to Tehran before January 1986, attempting to hide the 1985 Hawk shipment. Walsh said that Reagan and others present at the Nov. 12 meeting, including Weinberger and then-Vice President Bush, knew Poindexter's statements were false but "permitted them to stand."
At a subsequent National Security Council meeting on Nov. 24, then-Attorney General Edwin Meese said the November 1985 shipment was "not legal because no [presidential] finding" had been signed, but Weinberger's notes have Meese adding "President not informed." Walsh said Weinberger and others at the session, including Shultz, knew this was false.
A day later, at a news conference, Meese repeated the claim that the president had not known of the 1985 shipment when it occurred and did not learn about it until months later.
Weinberger's lawyer, Robert Bennett, issued a blistering statement Monday accusing Walsh of releasing "a work of fiction . . . that is all old stuff which is not supported by the evidence." Bennett attacked Walsh personally, calling him "a bitter man trying to rehabilitate a damaged reputation."
The independent counsel made his presentation in a voluminous "Fourth Interim Report to Congress," including 49 pages of Weinberger's long-secret notes about the Iran-Contra affair along with a 2-inch stack of exhibits that Walsh said he would have used at trial.
Walsh charged that in pardoning Weinberger, Bush "thwarted the public airing" of the new evidence and prevented the trial of a former colleague "whose prosecution arose out of events in which [Bush] himself participated."
If the Weinberger case had come to trial, Walsh said that former White House chief of staff Donald Regan would have testified that "he was concerned about the possibility of impeachment" because Reagan's advisers were making excuses for him that were not true. Walsh also said that Shultz would have testified that the White House was attempting to "rearrange the record" about Reagan's knowledge of a November 1985 arms shipment which they feared was illegal.
Walsh disclosed that Dec. 18, six days before the pardon, a close friend of Bush "erroneously" told the outgoing president in a memo that he and Reagan could expect to be called to testify as prosecution witnesses. In disclosing the memo, Walsh appeared to be implying that Bush's apprehension over being called as a witness may have been a factor in his decision to grant a pardon.
In Monday's report, Walsh expanded on the sharp criticism he initially directed at Bush when the pardon was announced and pointed out there is no precedent over the past 30 years for a president's pardoning someone who has been indicted but has not yet come to trial. Walsh said he was submitting the report to correct the "misconceptions" that Bush used as justifications for the Weinberger pardon.
The independent counsel said Bush was wrong in asserting that his action would not "prevent full disclosure of some new key fact to the American people" and wrong in saying that Walsh had "criminalized policy disagreements between the executive branch and Congress."
Walsh pointed out that Weinberger, in an August 1987 note, had opposed a Reagan pardon of earlier Iran-Contra defendants as "a terrible idea [that would] would confirm suspicions President [knew] about their activities, etc."
The report also noted that Bush, as vice president, also opposed pretrial pardons for them because "a pardon imputes guilt. . . . The American system, after all, is innocent until proven guilty."
If Weinberger had stood trial and the defense had called former administration officials as witnesses, Walsh said, he would have subjected them - particularly Meese and "perhaps" Bush - to "searching" public cross-examination "about the administration's conduct and their own in November 1986."
A Walsh spokesman said prosecutors had "absolutely no intention" of calling Bush or Reagan to the stand. But in his report, Walsh cited a Dec. 18 memo to Bush from a friend, Henry Catto, telling Bush that he and Reagan would be summoned.
Weinberger was charged with four counts of lying to Congress and prosecutors about the existence of notes he had taken while in office and his activities and knowledge of the Iran-Contra affair. In making his case Monday, Walsh used Weinberger's notes to show for the first time the former defense secretary's involvement in the arms deals as far back as the summer of 1985.