We don't know about anyone else, but we wake up every morning saying to ourselves, "If we were as rich as Dianne Feinstein, we wouldn't get anywhere near even a whiff of conflict of interest."

Actually, we say that only after running to our multi-media room to see if there is any news of an indictment for William "Cold Cash" Jefferson, Democrat of Louisiana, or investigation of Harry "Mr. Real Estate" Reid, the Senate Majority Leader until the good people of Nevada recall him for his demented "War Is Lost" utterants.

Those guys are penny-ante pikers who wouldn't be hired as drivers for a Big Con, compared to allegations ever so slowly emerging regarding some activities by Feinstein, the Senator from California and now chairman of Senate Rules Committee.

We're going to give you the short version, because the long one is very long and yet by no means conclusive.  The long version began last January when a West Coast investigative reporter, Peter Byrne, working under a grant from the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute, published an exhaustive (and exhausting) article regarding Senator Feinstein's activities while serving as chairperson and ranking member of the Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee (MILCON), from 2001 through 2005.

MILCON approves appropriations for military construction projects.  There are, necessarily, big bucks involved, billions of big bucks.

Senator Feinstein's husband is Richard C. Blum, a wealthy private equity financier.  Based on Feinstein's public disclosure records, the couple is worth upwards of $40 million and counting.  A fair portion of their worth, and their income, has derived from Blum's partial ownership of two virtually unknown companies, URS Corporation and Perini Corporation, during the time period in question. 

Obscure does not mean small.  Perini has identified Halliburton as a primary business competitor and URS makes Perini look like a mom-and-pop.

From 2001 through 2005, during Feinstein's considerable influence over MILCON decisions, Perini and URS were awarded military contracts worth roughly $1.6 billion, according to Byrne's research.  In addition, Blum has had sizable investments in at least three other companies receiving substantial military-related contracts.

Theoretically, members of MILCON vote only to approve projects and have no knowledge of the contractors hired to do those projects.  But that's where the Blum/Feinstein story gets about as hinky as they come.

As Byrne tells it, "The tale thickens with the appearance of Michael R. Klein, a top legal adviser to Feinstein and a long-time business partner of Blum's.  The vice-chairman of Perini's board of directors, Klein was a partner in Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, a powerful law firm with close ties to the Democratic Party, for nearly 30 years.  Klein and Blum co-own ASTAR Air Cargo, which has military contracts in Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba....

"In an interview with this reporter in September [2006], Klein stated that, beginning in 1997, he routinely informed Feinstein about specific federal projects coming before her in which Perini had a stake.  The insider information, Klein said, was intended to help the senator avoid conflicts of interest.  Although Klein's startling admission was intended to defuse the issue of Feinstein's conflict of interest, it had the effect of exacerbating it."

That's because, as Byrne contends, instead of recusing herself on the projects that Klein told her about, she acted on them, influencing contracts to the significant benefit of her and her husband's financial interests.

Thus far, Byrne's independent reporting and the scathing comments of a few ethics groups are about all that have happened.  Although Feinstein did resign from MILCON in March 2007, as Byrne's tale began to peek out, so far the accusations haven't even mussed her hair.

The mainstream media, which can frequently whip out 5,000 words (with flow charts) over lobbyists buying congressional aides a ham sandwich, are silent. 

The Senate Ethics Committee, fulfilling its traditional role as a bunch of blind mice looking for their own cheese, ain't squeaking. 

The Justice Department?  You must be kidding.  Now?  In this environment?  The Justice Department can't handle its own subpoenas, much less issue any.

As the recently late and greatly lamented Kurt Vonnegut would say, "So it goes."  In the most ethical Congress in history.