🚨 BOMBSHELL: Two former members and one current member of Katy Padilla Stout’s congressional campaign staff have come forward, speaking under condition of anonymity, to describe what they call an extremely hostile work environment.
The current staffer alleges that Stout routinely berates and curses at her staff. “She’s mean and angry all the time,” the staffer said. “Her smile in front of the cameras is fake. She treats us like slaves. She has us do her grocery shopping, take her dogs to the groomer, and pick up her kids from school, stuff completely unrelated to the campaign.”
The staffer continued: “Earlier this month I requested a day off to drive to Dallas and visit my mom, who was scheduled to receive her first round of chemo. I had worked 11 straight days with no days off. Katy went psycho on me during the phone call, telling me, ‘Are you fucking kidding me with this stupid shit two days before a debate? We’re not playing these fucking games. You either start giving me 110% ASAP or I’ll fire your ass.’”
One former staffer said Stout frequently had blowups over food. “On one occasion, one of my colleagues went to pick up lunch for all of us at Tacos El Rey, which is around the corner from the office. Katy ordered two asada tacos, a chicken taco, a carnitas taco, a cup of beans, and a cup of rice. It was her usual order. When she opened her bag, she noticed the carnitas taco was missing.
She went absolutely crazy on my colleague, accusing her of stealing food and asking if she didn’t pay her enough that she needed to steal. As my coworker tried to explain that they probably just forgot to put it in the bag, Katy threw the cup of beans at the wall where my coworker was standing, told her, while she was crying and visibly shaken, to clean up the mess and earn her paycheck, and then stormed out to eat in her car.”
Another former campaign staffer said, “She’s made her whole campaign about how her opponent treats women, that he’s a misogynist and says inappropriate things on his YouTube channel, but she would say super inappropriate sexual stuff all the time when I was there. It got really awkward sometimes because she’d go into detail with me about sexual dreams she’d had. It made me and others feel really uncomfortable.
On many occasions I witnessed Katy refer to other women as ‘bitches’ and ���cunts.’ On a separate occasion, we had the TV on and Scott Bessent was doing an interview. Katy referred to him as a ‘f*ggot Nazi enabler.’ I had to step out because I didn’t want to say something that would get me in trouble. I resigned about a week later.”
America, more than any other nation in world history, was shaped by the Christian tradition of spreading the gospel unto all nations.
Join us in celebrating International Religious Freedom Day.
You need no other example that our government hates us than the fact they keep literal living corpses on payroll if it helps their own agendas move ahead.
When leftists try to appeal to decency or the Constitution or Free speech, just remember that they're saying these to stop you for dealing with them.
They don't actually believe or want to uphold those ideas.
I'd love for everyone to be able to tell edgy jokes with no threat of deplatforming or firing.
But the Left chose the rules of discourse.
For years, those parameters have been brutally discharged against their political enemies, on pain of unemployment, or even imprisonment, in some cases.
It's not about vengeance; although that does make me giggle like Tucker at a holocaust museum.
It's about simple defensive tactics:
You don't renegotiate the terms of conflict until the aggressor who chose them no longer poses a threat.
Maybe stop shooting and killing us.
Or cease to advocate murderous Marxist ideologies. Then we'll rap with you.
Not a microsecond before.
A year on, Charlie Kirk's death remains a grievous loss.
His death didn't "kill" MAGA or "fracture" the Right, as is now popular to allege—the same connivers and instigators we can credit with such were accusing Charlie of being a semitic marionette mere hours before his assassination—but it did rob us of a present and future firebrand. Of a likely candidate for higher office, and an intrepid influence in changeable times.
Charlie's death wasn't "caused" by said schism, for it was already omnipresent; it occurred amid it. Serving as a dolorous reminder of the mortal stakes attendant our present hour.
It ought to have jolted us from the internecine freakshow of credibility-bereft podcast theatrics, and animated us against the murderous, Marxist threat in our midst.
Perhaps a perusal of BlueSky—where, even now, the Left's exultant glee at the butchery of a young father is utterly untrammeled—will achieve that effect.
Cynic that I am, I very much doubt it.
We are wed to our fractious stupidity, and I expect very few will reevaluate these myopic tactics until their consequences have overtaken us.
Much more importantly, the events of last year robbed a loving wife and two lovely children of their husband and father.
This heartbreaking reality cannot be allowed to pass from memory.
God bless you, Erika and the entire extant Kirk family.
Rest in peace, Charlie.
These juror interviews are extraordinary. They are admitting openly that they disregarded the law entirely for the sake of letting Clancy off the hook. There’s no other way to read it.
One juror says she originally wanted to vote guilty but changed her mind so that “Lindsay could get the help she needs.” That is a clear violation of the law. They were supposed to make a determination solely about guilt or innocence. They were not there to make sure anyone “gets help.”
Another juror says she voted not guilty because the prosecution never produced “character witnesses” proving Clancy was a “bad mother.” The problem is that A) killing your children IS definitive evidence that you’re a bad mother, and B) the prosecution would not have been allowed to call those kinds of witnesses. A witness solely testifying that Clancy was a bad mother would have been purely prejudicial. So this juror acquitted because the prosecution failed to provide evidence that they weren’t allowed to provide and which would have been irrelevant anyway. Extraordinary. This same juror even admitted that it was a “fact” that Clancy “viciously killed her children.” The word vicious literally means “done maliciously and with intent.” So if that’s a fact then they were obligated to vote guilty. But they didn’t.
Meanwhile another juror swooned over the defense attorney’s “entertaining” demeanor. And another one said that all of the facts of the case — “everything,” her words — “proved” that Clancy “loved her children.” Apparently strangling your children to death, in this juror’s mind, does not at all call your love for them into question.
Just a collection of the most morally obtuse idiots ever assembled. Amazing.
Its a fascinating thing.
5 years ago even mentioning that the 19th was in debate was as taboo as IQ race studies.
Now there is a small but growing realization among conservative aligned women that to get what they want in society, they will need to deprive their ideological enemies of their ability to act.
they were probably so scared and confused. it makes me so sick every single time i think about and i have to go hug my son. she really needs to fucking fry and every one of these retarded whores supporting her, projecting themselves onto her, needs to be neutered.
@hasanthehun Hasan has said that Israeli settlers were valid military targets and then explicitly said there are "baby settlers"
Anyone can look this clip up and find it
You're not mad that I said to shoot kids, you're just mad the kids I said to shoot aren't Jews