Deaver. Honorable. Libby? Hmm.

In today's Washington Post, Lou Canon writes:

Deaver's wisdom -- and his decency -- were demonstrated in his refusal to accept a pardon from President Reagan for his transgressions. He thought a pardon might tarnish Reagan's image. That was something Deaver always protected, even at the cost of his own.

This is the culmination of commentary on a quote found in some recently released diaries of Ronald Reagan regarding Michale Deaver, who recently passed away. Deaver, often described as Reagan's "guru" and "image maker," was convicted of perjury in 1987 and received a sentence of three years' probation and a fine of $100,000. Reagan considered pardoning Deaver as he left office, in 1989, because he believed Deaver (a longtime friend) had not done anything wrong. But Deaver passed the word up that he would not accept a pardon from the president. Currently, we have no specific documentation of that "word," just Reagan's diary entry. But, if reporting in the national press is the measure, Reagan's comment regarding the pardon (or lack of desire for the pardon) is the most important thing in the dairies.

Lou Canon suggests - without documentation or other support - that Deaver took the position that he took on a possible pardon because he was a wise and decent fellow who did not want to tarnish Reagan's image. That is quite interesting, for a couple of reasons. First, consider the fact that it wasn't all that long ago that everyone was focused on a potential pardon for Scooter Libby. The chant was that, if Libby accepted the pardon, it would have been an indelible, irrefutable declaration and confirmation of his guilt. That raises this interesting question: if Bush had offered a pardon to Libby and Libby had refused it, would anyone in the national news media have described Libby as a wise and decent fellow wishing to protect the reputation of the president?

Second, Deaver's behavior might lead one to suggest another explanation for his lack of interest in a pardon. After he was convicted, Deaver begged the court for mercy. He then left the court room and told reporters, "It was a very fair sentence, if I had been guilty." Deaver's lawyer immediately announced that the conviction would be appealed. He just didn't appear to act like a fellow especially anxious to admit guilt. The cynic might note that it is somewhat significant that Reagan's much publicized diary entry was written January 16, 1989, when Deaver was still in the process of appealing his conviction.

When Deaver finally abandoned his appeal (February, 1989) he said:

I really wanted to get on with my life [with] the firm belief that I was not guilty of the charges of which I was convicted.

Third, Canon's slant is at considerable variance with previous reporting on Deaver. I remember Deaver being tagged as "the acid rainmaker," "Reagan's Billy Carter," "the problem," "someone who unabashedly circumvented the ethics in government laws," etc. Wlliam Safire said the Deaver "scandal" was "more important" than Watergate. The New York Times condemned the judge that sentenced Deaver (a Reagan appointee) for missing an "opportunity" and complained that Deaver "deserved a taste of prison" not a "slap on the wrist." The Times said Deaver brought "special shame" to the administration and lamented the fact that justice had "blinked" in his case. Deaver became the latest poster boy for privilege and special treatment in the justice system.

Deaver is in the news, of course, because he recently passed. But why is the reference to a pardon in Reagan's dairies such an item? Because Deaver is now loved by his former critics? Certainly not. Reagan's entry wouldn't be of particular interest at all but for the fact that Scooter Libby's sentence was recently commuted by President Bush. And we are now all being invited to make a comparison of sorts.

Finally (while we are on the topic of comparisons), it is one thing to not be interested in a pardon, after the fact, when you were never looking at prison to begin with. But what if Deaver (convicted on three counts of perjury) had been sentenced to 15 years in prison? Would he have rejected a pardon then, because he was a wise and decent fellow who cared about Reagan's image? Would he have have rejected a commutation of sentence - like Libby's - as well? I am guessing not.