Harry Reid's Ethics

Retired Geezer tips this post by Captain Ed. Here's the summary:

"Let's get this straight. Reid's failure to follow the Senate rules on disclosure in 2001, when he sat on the Ethics Committee, somehow got set up by the Republicans. Reid's connection to an attorney involved in a bribery case that directly related to zoning decisions in Clark County, where they both owned property, was a Rovian plot set in motion in 1998. And now Reid's new disclosures of property in an area where he has taken an intense legislative interest somehow relates to Republicans, when no one even mentioned the parcels in question -- because Reid failed to disclose them during his entire time as Senate Minority Leader, while he has castigated Republicans for alleged ethical lapses."

Over at his blog, Reid's defenders lamely attempted to suggest that it was a minor, technical thing, and that it was as-yet uncertain whether he had actually violated the rules. In the Review Journal the day after the story first broke, he suggested he would file an amended disclosure if the Ethics Committee asked him to -- not mentioning that at the time, he was the ranking Democrat on the Ethics Committee. One would expect him to have some familiarity with the ethics rules, no? So why did he have to wait for the committee's verdict before filing his amended disclosure?

To see if the story had any legs, I suppose. If a story isn't sexy enough, delay favors you because by the time the real facts are discovered no one reads past the headline.

But every story has legs in the blogosphere, as Captain Ed is demonstrating.

Incidentally, Reid is still silent over at his blog.