“None of us really understands what’s going on with all these numbers.”

—David Stockman

So began the December 1981 Atlantic Monthly article by William Greider on President Reagan’s budget director, David Stockman, in which Mr. Stockman won himself praise from the journalist for his “intellectual honesty” in return for deriding Reagan’s tax cuts as “trickle down” and warning of “solvency problems” — i.e., deficits — that would be created by the tax cuts together with soaring spending on a “greedy” Pentagon. It all takes on a certain new meaning in light of Mr. Stockman’s indictment yesterday on federal fraud charges.

At the time — and since then — Mr. Stockman’s remarks in the Atlantic article were seized on as evidence that Reaganomics was wrong. As a New York Times editorial at the time put it, “The article, whose ample quotations are undisputed, adds up to a stunning confession: The Reagan Administration’s vaunted economic policy cannot work; the Administration knows that; and yet the Administration keeps on flogging it as just the medicine America needs.”

Actually, the Reagan defense buildup helped win the Cold War, the tax cuts ushered in unprecedented prosperity, and the deficits shrank as a percentage of the gross domestic product as the economy grew. It hasn’t stopped the left from making the same arguments against President Bush’s tax cuts, which have been derided on similar grounds, with similar lack of evidence. As for Mr. Stockman — well, yesterday he was indicted on federal charges of conspiracy, securities fraud, bank fraud, and wire fraud.

It’s a stunning denouement to one of the most discredited figures in American fiscal history. The man who fretted that Reagan was running America into a sea of red ink had himself presided, as the chairman and chief executive of an auto parts supplier, Collins & Aikman, Inc., over the bankruptcy of a public company that was traded on the New York Stock Exchange.

We don’t mind saying that a reading of the 65-page indictment handed up in the case, which was sought by the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York, Michael J. Garcia, discloses some charges that strike us, at first blush, as a bit thin. Among Mr. Stockman’s supposed “crimes” was a projection of earnings of which the company eventually fell short, to which we can only say if the Bush administration’s Justice Department intends to criminalize optimism among chief executives, it could be one of the few things that would force us to consider adding our names to the list of those who want Attorney General Gonzales fired.

Other “crimes” include perpetrating “fraud” on JP Morgan Chase, Credit Suisse, and General Electric Capital Corporation, which are big and tough and shrewd enough fish to brave the financial risks without a lot of protection from government lawyers and who, had the deals worked out, no doubt would have cited the levels of risk to justify their fees. Or, to put it another way, aren’t they “qualified investors”? Mr. Stockman’s lawyer, Elkan Abramowitz of the firm Morvillo, Abramowitz, yesterday called the case “a misguided prosecution that threatens to destroy an innocent man.” Mr. Stockman himself said “the government’s case amounts to a crimeless prosecution that I intend to vigorously challenge because I did nothing wrong.”

And it may well be that he’ll get acquitted. But if a conviction in this case serves to discredit once and for all the financial and accounting acumen, and even, yes, the “intellectual honesty” of the man who was used by the left in its attempt to undermine Reagan’s policies — well, it is going to be illuminating to see how the matter will be handled by the New York Times, the Atlantic, and the left factions. And it wouldn’t be surprising to see at least a slight schadenfreude among those who bear the scars of the battles during the years of struggle in which supply-side economics was guided to triumph despite the betrayal of the man who will soon be sitting in the dock.