Shifting focus

In a sudden fit of balance, AP gives us some interesting reporting on the Abramoff Scandal:

Abramoff Tied to Dorgan Donation, Tribe Says

WASHINGTON - New evidence is emerging that the top Democrat on the Senate committee currently investigating Jack Abramoff got political money arranged by the lobbyist back in 2002 shortly after the lawmaker took action favorable to Abramoff's tribal clients.

A lawyer for the Louisiana Coushatta Indians told The Associated Press that Abramoff instructed the tribe to send $5,000 to Sen. Byron Dorgan (news, bio, voting record)'s political group just three weeks after the North Dakota Democrat urged fellow senators to fund a tribal school program Abramoff's clients wanted to use.

The check was one of about five dozen the Coushattas listed in a tribal ledger as being issued on March 6, 2002, to various lawmakers' campaigns and political causes at the instruction of Abramoff, tribal attorney Jimmy Fairchild said Monday.

Many of the recipients were lawmakers who had just written letters to the Bush administration or Congress supportive of Abramoff's tribal causes, documents show.

In Dorgan's case, at issue is $20,000 in donations recieved from tribes represented by Abramoff and the appearance that it was payment for a letter he wrote to the President supporting a tribal school program.

Previously, reporting in this has been focused primarily on Republicans, and the left has made numerous statements about the Republican's involvement while turning a blind eye to their own members caught up in the scandal. As the reporting has shifted toward something more balanced, the left, particularly the DNC, has adopted silence. Considering the aggressiveness of the DNC attacks at the outset of the story, I can't help but surmise that the DNC was blind-sided by the media on this, having been able to depend on the MSM's portward tilt in the past for cover.

In my previous posts, I've commented on the problematic nature of this particular scandal for the Democrats. After all, how can you deride the Republican "culture of corruption" when Harry Reid, Byron Dorgan, Mary Landrieu, and others are part of the same club? Defending their own is equally difficult when by default, they defend Trent Lott, Tom Delay, Roy Blunt and the rest. Not that Dorgan doesn't try, albeit weakly:

Dorgan's staff said Dorgan believes the letter was drafted by Sen. Conrad Burns (news, bio, voting record), R-Mont., who also signed it and got similar donations from Abramoff's clients in the same time frame.

Considering the treatment Republicans received from the DNC over this, I find it curious that Senator Dorgan would use the "he did it, too!" defence.

So far, everyone involved is saying the same thing:

"The suggestion in the story that I may have supported that school construction program because of Jack Abramoff or because of campaign contributions from Indian tribes is clearly and despicably wrong," Dorgan said.

But Dorgan's position as ranking Democrat on the committee charged with investigating the scandal adds another dimension to the story. He denies that it affects his duties, though:

Dorgan's spokesman, Barry E. Piatt, said he believed his boss had pursued the congressional investigation of Abramoff aggressively.

Asked why that investigation hasn't focused more on donations to lawmakers who wrote letters favorable to Abramoff's clients, Piatt said, "They're investigating what appears to be massive fraud, and there's lots of ground to cover and it is still early."

Honestly, folks. If Chuck Grassley was on that committee, what would the Democratic reaction be? And they'd be right. Even if this all turns out to be just a tempest in a teapot, the appearance of suspects conducting their own investigations casts a pall over any resulting conclusions that can't be ignored.

The appearance of impropriety is unmistakable. Senator Dorgan should step aside from the investigation. And if anyone on the Indian Affairs Committee is implicated in the Abramoff scandal, they should join him.

On the other hand, staying on simply reinforces what we've known all along - Democrats are only interested in dealing with corruption when it occurs in someone else's party. And this time it appears that the press is noticing.