RICHMOND — Virginia first lady Maureen McDonnell bought nearly $9,800 in clothing with money from her husband’s political action committee and tapped into his campaign and inaugural funds to buy $7,600 in mostly unspecified items, according to records and a representative for the PAC.
The spending is legal under Virginia’s lax campaign finance laws, which prohibit the conversion of political funds for private use only when a PAC or campaign committee disbands — not while it is operating.
But the purchases are unusual in Virginia, where campaign finance records indicate that candidates do not routinely dip into political funds to buy personal items such as clothing for themselves or their spouses.
Maureen McDonnell’s use of political donations comes to light at a time when she and her husband, Gov. Robert F. McDonnell (R), are under intense scrutiny for accepting luxury items and $120,000 in loans from wealthy Virginia businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr. Federal and state investigators are probing the Star Scientific executive’s ties to the McDonnells, who promoted his firm’s nutritional supplement, Anatabloc. Last week the governor apologized for embarrassing the commonwealth and repaid the loans.
Several gifts that have drawn investigators’ attention seem aimed at polishing Maureen McDonnell’s image as first lady. They are looking into whether the former Washington Redskins cheerleader and mother of five received free cosmetic dental work from a Richmond-area dentist, jewelry from a state delegate and a $15,000 Bergdorf Goodman shopping spree from Williams.
Using political money for clothes helped McDonnell step up her style while her family’s finances were hit by the plunging real estate market.
Bob McDonnell won the 2009 governor’s race as several properties that he and his family bought for a combined $3.84 million at the height of the real estate boom had lost value. Maureen McDonnell complained to officials at Opportunity Virginia PAC that she didn’t have the wardrobe or resources necessary for her new role as first lady, according to a person familiar with the PAC’s operations, who spoke on condition of anonymity to maintain a relationship with the McDonnells.
Boo Hoo. Lots of people took financial hits during the economic crash of 2008. Many people lost money in real estate and many people lost money on the stock market. That is a lame excuse. Maybe Hubby Bobby shouldn’t have run for office if he was having financial problems. Regardless of Virginia’s non-existent finance ethic laws, both McDonnell’s should have known better than these kinds of blunders. People don’t usually give to political campaigns to outfit the first lady.
I would rather have my first lady buying her clothes off the rack. I am not impressed with designer clothes. In fact, I wouldn’t care if she bought her outfits at K-Mart. That would be better than thinking that the former cheerleader was simply just a scumbag.
It’s their campaign funds, and it is entirely legal under Virginia law. Where’s the beef, or is this just the WaPo piling on with an anything-goes partisan hack job?
@Wolverine
Do you think this behavior is ethical? Do you want to contribute to the ‘best dressed’ fund when you make political contributions?
Just because something is illegal does not make it right. Do you think make Virginia needs to amend its laws? Do we need new legislation from our General Assembly?
Or…is it ok because it’s Republicans? Maybe we should just turn a blind eye.
The beef is that the McDonnells are an embarrassment to Virginians. Their sense of entitlement is indisputable. They dodged falling on hard times by gouging the tax-payers and using their position to curry favor, wealth and luxury from others.
Would you be more comfortable if I had quoted the Richmond Times Dispatch or the Roanoke Times? How about the Virginia Pilot? They are all running similar stories.
Wolverine, your situational ethics astound me.
Was it legal? Did those campaign funds belong to the McDonnell campaign? Could they spend those funds legally in this manner? Yes, yes, and yes. This is between McDonnell and his donors. I wasn’t one of them. Were you? There is enough legitimate stuff out there for which the McDonnells can be reproved without partisan piling on about things which are entirely legal.
You talk of my “situational ethics.” May I ask how this legal activity merits calling the Virginia First Lady a “scumbag”? Would not a mere “I disapprove on principle” do the job? Should I have called Michelle Obama a “scumbag” for the $500,000 bill the taxpayers got from the USAF and USSS for that personal vacation trip to Spain in 2010?
BTW, Michelle Obama also wears designer clothes. The ivory chiffon, on shoulder gown she wore at most of the 2013 inaugural balls was by Jason Vu. She reportedly paid for it (How much nobody knows). She borrowed the diamond jewelry. Actually, she looked pretty sharp. Check out About.com Women’s Fashion (article by Cynthia Nellis) for the list of top designers favored by the First Lady.
What does Michelle Obama have to do with Mrs. McDonnell? Absolutely nothing.
The McDonnells have shown impropriety at every turn and seem to think nothing is wrong with their behavior. This one incident doesn’t make me think Maureen is a scumbag but the collection of evidence against these two sure pushes them definitely in that direction. Every week turns up more evience of them taking privileges that ordinary Virginians aren’t entited to. I believe the abuse of employees in the governors mansion also might put her on my special scumbag list. Certainly running around trying to push a tobacco product to “save Virginia money” might also qualify her for that special word also.
Partisan? I don’t think so.
Was signing the ultra sound bill partisan? Oh yea. A real leader would have not subjected the women of Virginia to an unnecessary medical procedure that only added extra expense to getting a legal medical procedure–a procedure that is their constitutional right. More spending.
The bait and switch attempt regarding Mrs. Obama isn’t going to deflect the conversation off of Maureen McDonnell’s inappropriate behavior.
As for campaign donations being off limits for criticism…I bet there are all sorts of people out there who donated to Bob McDonnell’s campaign fund who are madder than wet hens right now. I seem to remember a bunch of yahoos out in California going to a real questionable club with some pretty wild expenses. The hue and cry brought about the end of Michael Steele as Chairman of the National Republican Committee because of the use of campaign funds. I never saw what HE did wrong. Campaign funds, hoever, aren’t just free money sitting around.
There is still a federal investigation going on about all of the McDonnell’s questionable behavior.
I think that designer was Jason Wu. My feminine side sometimes errs at this hour.
Being “legal” does not make it moral as you should know and as you have pointed out regarding other issues. Using that particular argument is definitely situational.
I wonder why thay thought it necessary to record thse expenses as ‘travel expenses’ or ‘event expenses’? Ah, this certainly not going to help.
I couldn’t be more pleased with my NoVA sales tax increase this year. It’s important to keep the governor and his family in the lifestyle to which they are entitled. I have to keep reminding myself of those important lifestyle perks when I’m stuck on I-95 northbound at 6 am.
That sales tax increase just pisses me off in general, Emma. I want the entire state to share the tax increase, not just the lucky few localities. Everyone uses the damn roads and we are the ones stuck in traffic. You are right.
Amazing that the politicians who have access to PAC funds and campaign funds always find the loopholes in order to further their own purchases. The campaigns often buys meals and travel way after the person is elected – fostering the constant campaign image of elected officials.
VA needs to update its ethics laws around political spending and donations. I now question the Gov’s ethics when he uses the “family donation” loophole and stands their and says that donation were not made to him, they were made to family members – and does not see any conflict of interest. I am not an elected official, but trust me – if someone with business before my company gave money to my children – or loaned money to my family business – I would be fired and possibly brought up on charges.
Yeah, wolverine,quit making excuses for the governor’s lack of ethics. If his wife needs new clothes, she should buy them herself. She probably needed new sizes after eating all the food she stole from the governor’s mansion.
The current state and federal campaign finance laws are poison to good governing. Our governor and First Lady might not be criminals, but their actions are disheartening.
I agree. The fact that Virginia laws allow such goings on shows a definite need for change.
Michelle Obama used nearly $500,000 of our tax money (tax dollars, mind you, not campaign funds) to provide security and transport for herself , some family, and some friends in a posh resort in Spain, plus travel to some major Spanish tourist spots. This was a personal vacation, mind you, not official business. This tax money was spent in the middle of a prolonged recession with high unemployment, record numbers of people on food stamps, an historically high national debt, and federal spending way over the top. Then she uses her personal fashion advisor in Chitown to coordinate her selection of designer clothes for public events. In the meantime, her husband’s approval ratings are sinking because of the crumbling ObamaCare mess and because of numerous scandals in which the true answers are kept from Congress and the public. By the associative standards of this thread, therefore, I declare the First Lady of the USA to be a “scumbag.”
No, I don’t really. I think her husband is a disaster but I kind of like her personally. She reminds me of many of the very tough African women I have known — especially the small business owners. And she dresses well. She may have guaranteed Jason Wu’s future. I refuse to call any First Lady a scumbag because I am pissed at her husband.
Starryflights, on the other hand….heh, heh, heh.
Apples to apples please. Compare Michelle Obama to other first ladies, not governors wives.
You apparently are very protective of Maureen McDonnell.
I think both of them are an embarrassment.
Funny how the first three, short paragraphs of the WaPO article describe an activity which they cite as entirely legal under Virginia law. Then they go into a rehash of all the other accusations against the McDonnells, some of which do, indeed, merit investigation and even criticism. But I will say that the WaPO was slimeballing it on this one. I guess they got impatient waiting for another bone with real meat on it. Yellow journalism.
What do the Obamas have to do with Imelda McDonnell? These diversions are tiresome…
I’m disgusted that we need laws that require people to do the right thing. Buying clothes and free dental work are not too difficult for anyone to figure out on their own.
What does Maureen McDonnell’s entirely legal purchase of clothes, using campaign PAC funds, for campaigning and the inaugural celebration have to do with ultra sounds and sales taxes?
It shows corruption and a not so hidden agenda.
Let’s not forget the poorly thought out First Ladies portraits she had commissioned – not paid for with our money but languishing unhung. Hers was redone until a favorable image – 20 years younger and 20 pounds lighter – emerged. That vanity project and her reported abuse of her staff paints an unflattering picture. I’m unsure of where she acquired the skills necessary to pull down $30,000 for a quick lecture. Other than waving her pom poms when she was much younger, I don’t recall her developing any expertise that would warrant her being paid that sum.
“20 years younger and 20 pounds lighter…vanity project….unflattering picture.” Wow, cat claws too!
It sounds to me like an insecure woman who needs to rely on what she was rather than what she has become. That’s pitiable.
Since you chose to compare the governor’s wife to first ladies, can you imagine Laura or Barbara Bush, either one, carrying on so about a picture not capturing their image from 20 years ago? Both have aged gracefully and beautifully.
There are none so blind as those who will not see…
Hmmm, I have said twice in two separate posts that there are things involving the Governor which merit investigation and criticism. This one, however strikes me as a deliberate stretch, sort of like giving someone another kick when they are down.
Hah, Censored. “Vanity project” Not so blind as to be unable to see Nancy Pelosi’s new face.
Nothing quite says kick ’em while they’re down like the indignity of a medically unnecessary ultra sound and the accompanying expense. Now that is not a stretch.
How is Maureen McDonnell’s using campaign funds legal? She was NOT, I repeat, NOT running for any elected office. She is the First Lady of Virginia by an act of providence–not the voters. Any money she spent was not done legally–in my not so humble opinion. They don’t mond screwing over the citizens of the Commonwealth, particularly if the don’t get caught–which they did. McDonnel and his wife have literally pissed into the political wind.
And, yes, we all understand that the real WaPo target here is the upcoming state election.
Blame the messenger. Create a diversion. Hmmm. I thought the McDonnells were the subject. What does Nancy Pelosi have to do with the McDonnells?
Um, McDonnell isn’t running in the next election. I am glad the WaPost has been on this story. There are too many apologists for this kind of behavior.
Wolve – I would think this stuff about Mrs. McDonnell is working to Cuccinelli’s advantage. It makes him look like the picture of rectitude by comparison and distracts greatly from some of his past positions and activities. If the Post’s agenda were to influence the upcoming election, one would think they would lie low on the McDonnells.
Disagree, Scout. I suspect that the WaPO believes a constant pounding of these negative ethnics issues on McDonnell’s lame duck head (and there are most certainly a lot of negatives — a Rolex watch, of all the stupidity) will rebound against the Republican ticket just by putting a critical number of voters off the entire brand.
Jeepers, ethics, not ethnics.
WaPo:
Oh PUH-leez! Charity? She was just borrowing them? Bridge for sale!!!
I came to this discussion late, but Wolverine, you must really be desperate to try to draw a parallel between Ms. Obama’s security costs and the efforts of an ex-Redskins cheerleader to grab money and bling in return for product promotion. One is the first lady of the most powerful country in the world and thus subject to extreme danger, and the other is a vain, grasping governor’s wife who extorts Rolex watches from people and has her portrait altered to hide all the pounds she’s put on since she worked the sidelines. Ms. Obama has worked hard for child nutrition and health, an effort that could save millions of taxpayer dollars (and lives) if the GOP would stop blocking all her efforts. Ms. McDonnell has worked hard to promote a tobacco snake-oil product that has no proven benefit of any kind.
Not a very favorable comparison, but you went there, not me!