Politics | 11/12/2008 7:00 am

Palin Innocent in Shopping Spree Scandal, Says Source

Insider sources exonerate Palin in clothing debacle, but raise even more mysterious questions…

By The Staff at wowOwow.com

Sarah Palin caught a lot of flack for spending an alleged $150,000 on her campaign-ready wardrobe. The matter’s been fodder for plenty of press, but Gov. Palin finally spoke out this week and told Fox News’s Greta van Susteren that she had nothing to do with the controversial shopping sprees at upscale shops. Said the former vice-presidential candidate, "[I] did not order the clothes. Did not ask for the clothes. I would have been happy to wear my own clothes from day one."

Today, a source close to John McCain’s presidential campaign revealed exclusively to wowOwow that it was two stylists who often do work for CBS journalist Katie Couric who were hired by former CBS News political analyst and McCain senior strategist, Nicolle Wallace, around the time of the Republican National Convention. Wallace had worked for CBS Evening News until May 2008 when she left to work on the McCain campaign. Said the source, "They weren’t given any budget or parameters. They just told the stylists to work for her, because coming from Alaska, she needed a new look. She was a small-town girl who needed to look like a big-city girl."

Wallace is close friends with Couric. Couric would go on to get the second major interview and the longest television time with the former Republican vice-presidential candidate.

The two stylists, whose names have not been released, were the ones who bought the controversial wardrobe that Palin went on to wear. The source said that Sarah Palin "was used to wearing Ann Taylor and then all of a sudden, clothing was being brought in for her family." Concluded the source, "They simply picked out the clothes for Gov. Palin and told her to wear it. The stylists were told not to tell her how much the clothes cost but just to put them on."

Palin went on to distance herself even further in her van Susteren interview, "[I] didn’t know the New York stylists who they had hired or anything else. They were really nice gals. They were wonderful people. And you know, it was, I guess, productive, in a sense, in that they picked out some really nice clothes to borrow for a while there. But that was not anything that the Palin family would have chosen for ourselves."

112 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

This interview with Greta was the link I posted yesterday and remarked how sympathetic it was. I am still puzzled as to why all this hoopla over the clothes and other derogatory stories about Palin surfaced from the McCain camp itself? What the heck is that all about? She either stepped on somebody’s toes or they set out to blame her for the failure of his campaign or…???????

By phyllisDoylePepe on 11/12/2008 7:27 am

e-mail alert

phyllis: “She either stepped on somebody’s toes or they set out to blame her for the failure of his campaign or…?” It seems to me that your second thought is most likely closer to the truth. The real news target for me isn’t in all of the Governor Palin fingerpointing but in outing the architects responsible for the it. While I was not a McCain or Palin supporter I’d love for someone to get to the who, what and why of all of the scapegoating.

By E on 11/12/2008 10:30 am

e-mail alert

Phyllis, While I never thought Palin was a good choice, I always thought the $150M number was suspect. I think she was sabotaged by Katie Couric’s friend and stylists (no budget? who operates like that???) —- Clearly there were 2 camps at McCain headquarters and they were not able to come together to form a cohesive team … the negative stories attributed to anonymous sources are also outrageous and unprofessional. If I were a Republican operative, I’d make it my business to learn who they were and they’d never work for me or anyone else, if I could help it. The last thing you need on a team is someone who doesn’t know what it is to be a member of a team.

By LucindaHerbert on 11/12/2008 10:49 am

e-mail alert

Phyllis Good question. Why doesn’t McCain come out and clear the nonsense up? As to Van Susteren, she was on of the only journalists that was remarking about the unfair treatment that Hillary got. She questioned journalists and and the industry, as was basically ignored. I don’t think she like the treatment of Palin because she felt it was sexist, like the treatment of Hillary. She stated that many platforms that Palin believed in, she personally did not agree with. She questioned many of her actions in other reports on her, but I think in the long run, Van Susteren felt she was one of the only journalists out there reporting on women and not just trashing them.

By FrannieEm on 11/12/2008 5:17 pm

e-mail alert

(McCain Senior Stategist, Nicolle) Wallace is close friends with Couric. Couric would go on to get the second major interview and the longest television time with the former Republican vice-presidential candidate. With friends like that… “… they picked out some really nice clothes to borrow for a while there. But that was not anything that the Palin family would have chosen for ourselves.” Most of us understood that, Sarah.

By MarjorieC on 11/12/2008 7:33 am

e-mail alert

Hi Marjorie, Told ya so. Told you there would be a lot of falsehoods coming out about Palin. I see pies a launching. Becareful folks, that to gets messy.

By HABIBI on 11/12/2008 12:44 pm

e-mail alert

I agree, Elaine. If we’re going to be looking at and talking about Gov. Palin, let it be focused on something substantial. I really, really don’t think the clothing issue is worth anyone’s interest. Don’t we have bigger issues to consider right now?

By Susan B on 11/12/2008 1:34 pm

Hi Susan, The only thing tho is that so many on here had nothing good, period, to say about Sarah and to those, have the pie on their faces. :)

By HABIBI on 11/12/2008 2:11 pm

e-mail alert

She’s a fascinating person, almost Diana-like in her ability to attract strong opinions of adoration or deprecation. When it comes to Sarah Palin, nobody seems to be neutral. I’ve heard it said that she has “it” — that undefinable quality of being able to fascinate and draw attention. Her recent interviews with the “elite” media have continued to stoke interest in her — no doubt exactly what she was counting on — and it’s clear that she has no intention of going away anytime soon. That’s probably what bugs her detractors the most. They were looking forward to her disappearing, but she hasn’t. I’m not sure about those detractors having pie on their faces, though, because there’s still plenty of other legitimate fodder surrounding her mental qualifications. She clearly has plenty of native intelligence, but lacks the basic curiosity required to feed an intellect and knowledge base. I think that’s why she strikes many as stupid, which she is not. She simply hasn’t worked on her intellect all these years, never had to. Up until this point, she’s been able to rise using her magnetic personality and public presence (the “it” factor) and little else. But if she’s serious about leading the free world, a place of deep troubles and interconnected complexities, she’s ultimately going to need an arsenal of knowledge to be effective. Can she do that? We’ll see.

By Susan B on 11/12/2008 3:27 pm

Susan I was always curious as to how smart she really is or isn’t. Her style of rambling speech and overuse of “too”, and that her phrasing “rolls” and is repetitive leaving the listener with the impression that she is not very smart. I don’t know how much her interview with Couric was edited, or how badly it was edited or chopped up, so it is hard to say how much she dropped the “ball”. There was a quick side interview with her with another journalist, and she was asked about ‘the what do you read?’ question, and her response was she felt it was a little insulting, as if Couric was insinuating that she didn’t read. She understood what was going on and was offended by it. Like an attempted put down, and it kind of took her back. We shall see how smart she really is. Here are some links that might interest you. http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/10/08/palin/index1.html http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/11/12/palin/index1.html

By FrannieEm on 11/12/2008 5:08 pm

e-mail alert

Thanks for the links, Frannie. I’m no expert, of course, but Gov. Palin seems to be without curiosity about the world at large and relies almost exclusively on her limited personal experiences. Upbringing usually fosters that in a person. She doesn’t come off as literate — and by that I mean that she doesn’t read much beyond the Bible — so it didn’t surprise me that she couldn’t name periodicals in that interview, and was put off by Couric’s question. I do think she’s intelligent with an excellent memory, but has what my grandpa called a “lazy mind” which carries over to speech patterns. Plenty of Americans are like her, that’s why so many see her as one of their own — as opposed to a better spoken and well informed person. She does have a great ear for inflection, something she really knows how to use and something that engages the listener. She keeps people’s attention, I’ll give her that!

By Susan B on 11/12/2008 5:52 pm

Her style of rambling speech and overuse of “too”, and that her phrasing “rolls” and is repetitive That manner of speech is often noticed in people who are extremely sleep-deprived, and using stimulants (hopefully, to “keep going”). They’re simply too washed out (or whatever is doing it) to respond, but the brain races on. It’s very sad.

By Cjay on 11/14/2008 8:18 pm

e-mail alert

Carol Or maybe being thrust on to the public so quickly and so many people trying to destroy her, maybe she was a little nervous. How would you react?

By FrannieEm on 11/17/2008 8:55 pm