Maybe it is anger--anger at the American people for failing to demand full accountability of their leaders, for allowing Reagan to ride off into the sunset instead of joining Richard Nixon in (at least temporary) disgrace. Anger at government officials like North and Poindexter for their arrogant--and undemocratic--belief that they know better than either the voters or their representatives what policy our country should pursue. Anger at everyone who believes these criminals are heroes. And anger at George Bush, whose disdain for the Constitution is matched only by his disrespect for the American people.

It's not enough that Bush signalled that shadow governments are acceptable and the separation of powers meaningless by cooperating in the Iran-contra cover-up. He didn't even exhibit a shred of courage by admitting that what Weinberger and the others did was wrong, but that he had chosen to pardon them anyway.

Instead, Bush fed the American people a diet of bullshit rhetoric that redefines the criteria for criminality. It doesn't matter that Weinberger et al violated the law, he said, because "the common denominator of their motivation--whether their actions were right or wrong--was patriotism."

Whether their actions were right or wrong! The will of the people, expressed through their elected leaders means nothing; the law means nothing; the very concept of right or wrong means nothing--because these criminals were motivated by patriotism.

"Each," the President said, "has a record of long and distinguished service to this country." This may be a legitimate factor to consider at sentencing, but past conduct does not excuse the criminal behavior of Weinberger and the others.

Of course, each of these criteria applies as well to Bush himself as it does to those he pardoned. In a way, then, his rationalization of the pardons is an argument of selfdefense. And he's going to need it, because his crimes are also similar to those of the people he pardoned. It turns out the President kept a journal of sorts starting in November 1986--the month the scandal became public--and withheld the transcripts of that journal from Walsh until last month.

With everyone else acquitted or pardoned, Walsh has made Bush the subject of his investigation. Chances are he has a pretty good case against the President. And the best part is that he can call Weinberger as a witness for the prosecution--the former Defense Secretary can't plead the Fifth Amendment because he has already been pardoned.

So, as Bush rushes to finish his presidency and define his legacy with a flurry of foreign policy activity--intervention in Somalia, the Start II treaty with Russia, a final standoff with Iraq--Walsh is unlikely to let either Bush or the American people forget the Iran-contra scandal and cover-up.

To me, his dogged persistence--and, yes, his anger and vindictiveness--make Lawrence Walsh the true hero of the Iran-contra affair.