WASHINGTON | The House ethics committee on Thursday cleared U.S. Rep. Sam Graves of Missouri of any wrongdoing in connection with a congressional appearance by a friend last spring.</p><p> After the unanimous vote, the committee declared the issue closed.</p><p> Graves said in a statement later that &ldquo;the Committee found that not only was there no violation of any rule, but that even if the allegation were true, there would have been no violation of any rule.&rdquo;</p><p>The investigation by the panel &mdash; known officially as the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct &mdash; was related to the Tarkio Republican&rsquo;s failure to disclose the financial connection between his wife, Lesley Graves, and family friend Brooks Hurst at a House Small Business Committee hearing in March.</p><p> Graves, the ranking member of the Small Business Committee, had invited Hurst to be a witness. However, Graves did not mention the financial link between Hurst and Lesley Graves at the hearing, which dealt with renewable fuels and federal subsidies.</p><p> Hurst was involved with two renewable fuels cooperatives in Missouri. Lesley Graves was an investor in both.</p><p> The ethics committee said that Hurst represented the Missouri Soybean Association at the hearing, which &ldquo;prepared&rdquo; his &ldquo;testimony and &hellip; talking points.&rdquo;</p><p>It said that he &ldquo;advocated on behalf of the members of the association, and not for either of the entities in which Representative Graves&rsquo; wife owns an interest.&rdquo;</p><p> After reviewing the case for three months, the committee concluded that Graves &ldquo;did not violate any U.S. House of Representatives rule or standard of conduct for his role in inviting a witness, Brooks Hurst, to testify before the Committee on Small Business on March 4, 2009.&rdquo;</p><p> The Office of Congressional Ethics, a quasi-independent panel whose board includes several former lawmakers, referred the Graves case to the House ethics panel. It had found &ldquo;substantial reason to believe that an appearance of conflict of interest was created.&rdquo;</p><p> The House ethics committee said that facts did not support that conclusion.</p><p> Graves said in his statement that &ldquo;the anonymous accusation amounted to nothing more than a political smear.&rdquo; </p><p> The Office of Congressional Ethics&rsquo; most recent quarterly report, however, said that &ldquo;the OCE board has never authorized a review based on an anonymous &lsquo;complaint.&rsquo;&ensp;&rdquo;