The drip, drip, drip of revelations in Rep. Katie Hill’s scandal continues, and I’m not going to show you all the photos of the bisexual California Democrat who was in a three-way “throuple” relationship with her ex-husband and a young female campaign aide. But if you don’t want to click through to the Daily Mail story, I’ll summarize by saying she’s got an Iron Cross tattoo in her groin area, and photos showing her naked butt were posted to a “wife-sharing” site. There are also more screen-caps of text messages, including one in which the campaign aide, Morgan Desjardins, declares she is still “in love” with the congresswoman. Also, Desjardins wasn’t Hill and her husband’s first three-way:
A former tenant of the estranged couple said Hill and Heslep, had a ‘sexual relationship’ with a 21-year-old woman in 2010, the same year they were married.
Michael Pace, a Los Angeles-based technology analyst, said he rented a room in the couple’s Santa Clarita ranch and ‘walked in on the three of them’ multiple times.
‘I can absolutely confirm stuff like this went on even back then,’ Pace told DailyMail.com.
‘I left the house after six months because of all the weird sexual stuff going on in the open.
‘I walked in on the three of them in some very weird situations a few times so I know there was a sexual relationship going on.’
How many times do I have to say it? Never trust a bisexual.
Katie Hill: Does drugs, has multiple inappropriate sexual relationships with employees, posts exhibitionist pictures on Reddit, does "wifesharing," etc. etc.
Media: She's living her best life, give her some privacy.
Besides her admitted three-way “throuple” relationship with a female campaign staffer and her ex-husband, and the alleged affair with one of her male congressional staffers, now there are text messages indicating that Rep. Katie Hill (D-Calif.) may be suffering from bipolar disorder and exhibits symptoms of a chronic drinking problem:
In the four-part Vice documentary, “She’s Running,” which chronicled Rep. Katie Hill’s 2018 campaign, Hill and her staffers are often shown grabbing a drink, and the campaign headquarters featured an impressive “liquor” closet.
When Hill arrived in Washington, D.C., celebratory beverages continued to be a part of her life.
In text messages provided to RedState of conversations between Hill, her estranged husband, and their former throuple partner, by June 2019 all three were expressing concern about Hill’s drinking and its impact on her mental health and work performance.
During the last week of May, Hill was at home in the 25th District for Memorial Day events and visiting constituents before heading up to San Francisco to attend the California Democratic Party convention. Over the course of that week, Hill told Heslep and her female staffer that she wanted to end the throuple relationship to focus on “this important work” of impeaching President Trump.
At the convention, Hill was one of the main speakers and also had a big reason to celebrate – her friend Rusty Hicks was elected as party chair (after Eric Baumann was forced out amid sexual assault charges).
Kenny Heslep, Hill’s husband, didn’t accompany her to the convention, but the two were texting throughout the weekend. . . .
The next screenshot reveals that Hill didn’t return to her room until after 3:30 a.m., and she admitted to Heslep that she’s drunk. . . .
The Lydia to which Hill is referring is her psychiatrist. Heslep asks if Hill was talking to Lydia about the split-up. . . .
Hill tells Heslep that she doesn’t know where she’d been precisely, but in general to bars and a Mexican late night restaurant. She reiterates that she had been talking to Lydia “about drinking a lot.” . . .
On June 3rd, the female staffer confronted Rep. Hill about her drinking and reveals that Hill missed her flight and hid that fact from Kenny. . . .
Just a few days later – the day after her wedding anniversary – Hill missed another flight between Washington, D.C., and California, as a staffer named Cat told Hill’s throuple partner. Heslep asks, “Does anyone find it odd how many she’s been missing lately?” . . .
In addition to the text messages reviewed by RedState about Hill’s alcohol use, an elected official from a jurisdiction in Hill’s district told RedState on condition of anonymity that Hill was observed at a local event in mid-July visibly intoxicated, and that one of Hill’s staffers pulled Hill aside, saying, “We need to leave. You shouldn’t be here right now.” Hill then left the event without incident.
Like millions of Americans, Rep. Hill has been open about the fact that she lives with depression, as she tweeted on October 10th. . . .
In addition to regular appointments with her psychologist, Hill sometimes takes the prescription medication trazodone to manage manic episodes, according to the text messages.
Read the whole thing, which is full of screen-caps of text messages verifying all of this. We are not supposed to “stigmatize” mental illness, but I think electing crazy people to Congress is not a good idea, especially when the kooks are bisexual alcoholics. But in a representative form of government, maybe lunatics in her California district decided they wanted one of their own to represent them Washington?
Monday we brought you the story of Rep. Katie Hill (D-Calif.) whose nude photograph, depicting her brushing the hair of a 22-year-old female campaign staffer, is apparently evidence in her husband’s divorce case against her. Hill’s husband also alleges that she engaged in an affair with a male congressional staffer, Graham Kelly. So it would appear that Rep. Hill is further confirmation of my advice: Never trust a bisexual.
Democratic California Rep. Katie Hill on Tuesday denied having an extramarital affair with a male congressional staffer, but did not deny having such an affair with a female campaign staffer.
Hill blamed her ongoing “divorce from an abusive husband” for allegations that she had affairs with the two staffers in a statement released to Politico….
Hill called allegations that she was having an affair with legislative director Graham Kelly “absolutely false,” but didn’t deny having an affair with the female campaign staffer. The first-term congresswoman blamed a “coordinated effort to try to destroy me and people close to me” for the affair allegations.
“Intimate photos of me and another individual were published by Republican operatives on the internet without my consent,” she said, adding that she “notified Capitol Hill police who are investigating the situation and potential legal violations of those who posted and distributed the photos, and therefore will have no further comment on the digital materials.”
In other words, Hill is playing the victim. It’s a “coordinated effort” by her “abusive husband” and “Republican operatives.” And while Hill admits she had a three-way with her husband and the female campaign staffer, she denies sleeping with her male congressional staffer. Ace says:
I think she’s denying the heterosexual affair, but not the gay one, not just because there’s dramatic visual proof of the latter, but also because being gay is now just generally a defense against anything, as is being an illegal alien.
She’ll run on “persecution.” And whenever you ask her about it, she’ll respond, “I can’t answer, it’s persecution,” and the media will let her get away with that, the same as they’ve allowed Ilhan “Omar” Nur Said get away with her brother-marrying and Kuffir-banging for years.
Actually, there’s another reason why Hill might deny the affair with her male congressional aide: House Rule XXIII, clause 18(a).
Ted Deutch (D-FL), Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on Ethics, released the following statement late on Wednesday:
The Committee is aware of public allegations that Representative Katie Hill may have engaged in a sexual relationship with an individual on her congressional staff, in violation of House Rule XXIII, clause 18(a). The Committee, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), has begun an investigation and will gather additional information regarding the allegations.
The Committee notes that the mere fact that it is investigating these allegations, and publicly disclosing its review, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the Committee. No other public comment will be made on this matter except in accordance with Committee rules. . . .
“If Congresswoman Hill is engaged in a romantic relationship with one of her paid staffers, that is a clear-cut ethics violation,” a senior congressional staffer told Breitbart News this week. “These rules are in place to ensure Congress is a workplace free from abuse and sexual misconduct. The reports paint a troubling pattern that deserve a full investigation.”
It’s an ethics violation for a member of Congress to have sex with a congressional aide, whereas no such rule applies to campaign staffers.
Nevertheless, whatever the House Ethics Committee does, the important takeaway from this story is: Never trust a bisexual.
UPDATE: How did I miss this? In 2018, when Hill ran for Congress against a conservative Republican, she did so as an avowed bisexual:
As a bisexual woman married to a man, she has faced some pressure to be closeted, along with biphobia. Being out “was a huge decision early on,” she says, as many people urged her to hide her bi identity. But, she says, “I’ve been out as being bi since I was a teenager, right after high school.” She decided that remaining out was part of being “an honest, transparent politician.”
During the primary, she notes, she was accused of pretending to be bi in order to get endorsements from LGBTQ organizations (she has the backing of several, such as Victory Fund and the Human Rights Campaign). In the general election campaign, she’s heard some biphobic comments, with people saying she’s making her sexuality an issue. “I’m not making it an issue,” she says. “It’s just who I am.”
Yes, ma’am. Indeed, we see that now: “It’s just who I am.”
Hey since I broke this and I'm the one being threatened with jail time and my kids harassed at work and school I'd love for my piece to be tweeted ? https://t.co/kF8kcKpk0V
Everybody had a good point-and-laugh at David Atkins’s expense, without wondering: Why would a California Democrat be so filled with loathing of “rural white evangelicals”? Was he bullied by militant Baptists as a child? Has he ever actually met any of the rural white people he says are thoroughly despised by “the vast majority of Americans”? No, he’s just a liberal who can look at the map and read the exit polls the same as you or I can, and who therefore understands which demographic category most strongly supports the Republican Party. He hates white people and Christians and rural America because they are an obstacle to the Democrats’ project of turning America into a totalitarian one-party regime where dissent from the approved opinions is forbidden.
Of course, Atkins himself is white, but he lives in Santa Barbara, an affluent seaside enclave of privilege where the media home value is over $900,000 and only 1.4% of the population is black. It’s very easy for people who live in such circumstances to imagine that they are morally superior to everyone who lives in, say, Lowndes County, Georgia, where 37% of the population is black and the median home value is $129,700.
One thing I’ve tried to do with my kids is what I call “cultural education.” Like, there’s no reason children should grow up without an awareness of rock-and-roll classics, and I’ve had many rewarding experiences like the time I heard my youngest son, born in 2000, in the shower singing along to his Spotify rotation of Led Zeppelin. How cool is that?
A couple of days ago, I was driving my youngest daughter (born in 2002) to her summer internship and told her to look up “California Dreamin'” on her Spotify. Why was that song in my mind? Probably some headline I’d read about California’s recent descent into Third World chaos. It’s a forlorn bit of nostalgia to recall what California signified in the 1960s, before Democrats turned it into a socialist nightmare of typhus infections, homeless encampments and heroin needles. At any rate, the song had been stuck in my head and so I asked my 16-year-old daughter to play it on her phone — she’d never heard it before — and when it ended, I said, “That was Number One for the Mamas and Papas in 1966.”
My daughter is quite the chip off the old block, however, and she quickly Googled up the fact that “California Dreamin'” only made it to #4.
That seemed wrong, an injustice. From the first notes of the classical guitar intro to the sonic crescendo of the vocal harmony ending, “California Dreamin'” is a musical masterpiece, two-and-a-half minutes of pure genius in the key of A-minor. In 2004, when Rolling Stone published its list of “The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time,” this 1966 hit was #89 on the list and yet it never actually topped the charts? When I got home, I decided to explore this mystery further and, being rather obsessive about research, I dived in deep.
The Mamas and the Papas were formed in 1965 after the breakup of John Phillips’s first group, The Journeymen. Phillips, the son of a Marine Corps officer, had grown up in Alexandria, Virginia, attended a military school and won an appointment to the Naval Academy in Annapolis, but quit during his first year and then enrolled at Hampden-Sydney College before dropping out to pursue his musical career in New York City. Phillips became part of the folk-music scene in Greenwich Village, and The Journeymen landed a record contract in 1961, when Phillips was 25. (Click here to watch the group on the TV show Hootenanny in 1963.)
In 1962, while touring with The Journeymen, Phillips met a long-legged 17-year-old model in San Francisco. He divorced his first wife and married the model, Michelle Gilliam, but this new romance was one of the factors that contributed to the breakup of The Journeymen. The other factor was the arrival of The Beatles and the subsequent “British invasion,” which put an end to the folk-music scene. For a while, Phillips tried to keep going down the folk road, teaming up with Denny Doherty (from another Greenwich Village group, the Mugwumps) and Michelle to perform as The New Journeymen, but with little success. It was Doherty who suggested adding his former Mugwumps colleague and occasional girlfriend Cass Elliot (neé Ellen Cohen) to form a quartet. The new group’s name was inspired by the notorious Hell’s Angels motorcycle gang, who referred to their girlfriends as “Mamas.”
Meanwhile, there was a song inspired by Michelle Phillips’s first trip to New York in 1963. According to John Phillips, the couple went for a walk around the city “and all she had was California clothing . . . tennis shoes and . . . a tank top and jeans or something.” There was snow on the ground and Michelle was cold, so the couple went into a church to escape the weather and let her warm up for a few minutes. That night, in their Greenwich Village hotel room, Michelle was asleep while John was playing his guitar when the song began to take shape:
So I tried to wake Michelle up to write the lyrics down that I was doing. And she said, “Leave me alone. I want to sleep.”
He persisted until she did wake up, thus earning herself half the songwriting royalties of one of the greatest songs of the decade. The couple offered the song to folk singer Barry McGuire, who did them the favor of introducing them to Dunhill Records chief Lou Adler. The Mamas and the Papas performed background vocals on McGuire’s version of the song, but his gruff baritone didn’t give the record much energy. So what happened next is that, after Adler signed the Mamas and the Papas to their own contract, John Phillips took the master tape of the session, erased McGuire’s voice, and replaced it with him and Doherty singing the lead in duet. On the second verse (“Stopped into a church”), Doherty sings the solo lead in a strong bluesy tenor and then comes the song’s real magic moment. McGuire’s version of “California Dreamin'” had included a forgettable harmonica solo, but for the Mamas and the Papas version, Phillips brought in top studio pro Bud Shank, a veteran L.A. jazz musician. Shank listened to the track, improvised the alto flute solo, and “nailed it on the first take.” It was absolutely brilliant.
The success of “California Dreamin'” had an important influence on pop music in the 1960s, showing that the fusion of rock and folk — pioneered in 1965 by the Byrds — was a durable phenomenon. It helped establish the West Coast as the main scene for American rock music, solidified in 1967 when Jon Phillips organized the Monterrey Pop Festival, with a number of subsequently famous acts, including Jefferson Airplane, Jimi Hendrix and the Grateful Dead, performing in a show with the Mamas and the Papas as headliners. It’s possible that the subsequent careers of acts like the Eagles, Linda Ronstadt and Jackson Browne might never have happened had it not been for “California Dreamin’.”
OK, so why did it never make it to Number One?
When my daughter informed me that “California Dreamin'” peaked at #4 on the Billboard Hot 100, my assumption was that this was because the top three slots at the time must have been held by classic hits by major groups — the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, various Motown hitmakers. And indeed, after the song was first released in December 1965, the songs at the top of the chart included many such big hits by big names. For the week of Jan. 29, 1966, when the Mamas and the Papas were at #44, the Beatles had the #1 spot with “We Can Work It Out,” and upper reaches of the chart also included Smokey Robinson and the Miracles (“Going to a Go-Go,” #23), Stevie Wonder (“Uptight,” #21), the Rolling Stones (“As Tears Go By,” #6) and the Beach Boys (“Barbara Ann,” #2). But these weren’t the artists who ultimately froze “California Dreamin'” out of the top spot. Instead, on the week of March 12, when the Mamas and the Papas’ record peaked at #4, the song in the third-place spot was a wretched piece of drek by Herman’s Hermits. Why was this inspid tune, “Listen People,” at #3? Apparently because it was featured in a Connie Francis movie, When The Boys Meet The Girls.
Imagine that. You record one of the greatest records of the decade, but never get to Number One because of a stupid song from a crappy teen movie, a novelty tune by Frank Sinatra’s daughter, and a flag-waving tribute to militarism. “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity!”
So that was this week’s “cultural education” lesson. Kind of depressing, and the fate of the Mamas and the Papas makes it even sadder. The group broke up in part because Michelle Phillips cheated on her husband, first with Denny Doherty and then with Gene Clark of the Byrds. John Phillips became a heroin addict and, allegedly, raped his own daughter.
What’s perhaps weirdest of all about the Mamas and the Papas is that, whereas John Phillips was the leader of the group, Doherty sang lead on their first hit, and Michelle was movie-star beautiful, “Mama Cass” was the fan favorite, and the only member to have any musical success after the group broke up. The obese daughter of a Baltimore delicatessen owner, she had an IQ of 165 and had toured in a road company of The Music Man before becoming involved in the folk music scene.
All this, you see, from a song stuck in my head and a conversation with my teenage daughter. The car broke down today. Hit the freaking tip jar.
UPDATE: The comments immediately included objections to my statement that Cass Elliot’s death was “reportedly” from choking on a sandwich. As I said in reply to these comments, I linked to a contemporaneous Rolling Stone article that included this version, attributed to a “post-mortem” examination and a “coroner’s hearing.” This account was also part of the New York Times obituary: “According to The Associated Press, her physician said the singer probably choked on a sandwich.”
(Click to enlarge the image.) Yes, of course, I was aware that this has since been classified as an “urban legend,” although I have found only unsourced secondhand stories of how this legend allegedly got started: Supposedly, when they found Mama Cass’s body — she was in England, where she’d just played the London Palladium — there was a sandwich on the nightstand, and this led the coroner to jump to an erroneous conclusion that she had asphyxiated. Heart failure was apparently the actual cause of death, and it has been suggested that Elliot’s health had been impaired by her extreme diets in an effort to lose weight. She had been hospitalized a few months earlier after collapsing prior to a scheduled TV appearance. Certainly, it was not my intention to malign Cass Elliot — a talented performer I always admired — by repeating a disproven story. However, in point of fact, I am still not certain the death-by-choking story has been disproven, because I could not find online any well-sourced account explaining how the original (and supposedly discredited) report made it into the mainstream media before the truth was discovered. So I guess the bottom line here is the same as always: Never trust the New York Times.
Oh, and what I said about my car breaking down? Not an urban legend. Our ancient Nissan overheated on the interstate and I’ve now got a tow bill to worry about, not to mention whatever the repairs cost, so please remember the Five Most Important Words in the English Language:
A Tulare woman who plead guilty to multiple sex-related charges involving two teenage boys was ready to accept her sentence Monday, but a Tulare County judge put a stop to it.
Now, instead of serving a possible year in county jail, Coral Lytle, 41, could be sent to prison for 17 years.
Lytle was charged with 21 felony counts, including unlawful sexual intercourse, oral copulation and contacting a minor for sex. Court records show the incidents happened in 2017 between Sept. 27 and Oct. 4. The teenage boys were friends of her daughters, prosecutors said.
Judge Joseph Kalashian on Monday reviewed the probation department’s report and decided against imposing the indicated sentence. Judges can propose an indicated sentence as a way to give defendants an idea of what their punishment would be if they plead guilty.
The boys involved were ages 14 and 15, freshmen at Redwood High School. She and her husband Eric Lytle have four children. After she was arrested, Eric Lytle filed for divorce. Now let me ask a question: Why would a 40-something mom be interested in 14- and 15-year-old boys?
Having written up several cases like this one over the years, I have my own explanation for why some women are attracted to teenage boys, but I’ll let the commenters offer their own explanations.
Angelina’s work focuses on humanizing the Fat experience while honoring it’s unique monstrosity. She currently teaches at Merced College where she teaches Public Speaking and Interpersonal Communication. In their spare time, Angelina blogs about radical Fat acceptance and enjoys spending time with her queer family.
At this year’s annual convention of the Western States Communication Association (program here, archived here), Ms. Moles offered a performance entitled “Fattie Goes Oink,” in which she wallowed on a bunch of cupcakes while wearing only her underwear:
This is what California taxpayers are subsidizing as “higher education.”
Mike LaChance at Legal Insurrection observes: “Diversity is higher education’s unofficial new religion and those who don’t demonstrate enough faith will be punished.” The University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) recently “began requiring all prospective faculty hires to fill out an Equity, Diversity and Inclusion statement, which involves applicants mentioning their past, present and future contributions to diversity and equity, which are then taken into account during the hiring process via a qualitative grading process.” And this was not enough to satisfy the Diversity Cult on campus, with the UCLA student newspaper demanding “actual solutions to reduce the barriers in higher education for members of underrepresented communities, such as bolstering hiring pipelines to bring in more qualified minority applicants.”
Apparently, there are too many white males on the UCLA faculty to satisfy the bloodthirsty cannibal tribe of Social Justice Warriors on campus, and what this student editorial is actually saying is: “WE DEMAND HIRING QUOTAS! We want the university to hire only ‘underrepresented’ minorities — always, for every position — and never mind their so-called ‘qualifications’! NO MORE WHITE MALES!”
This demand for a Caucasians-Not-Welcome hiring policy is the logical conclusion of “diversity.” Whites are already persona non grata at UCLA, comprising only 27% of the freshman class, which is 28% Asian, 22% Hispanic, 3% African-American and the rest being either mixed-race, international students or “other domestic.” Yet this dwindling minority of white UCLA students is the constant target of hateful rhetoric, accusing them of being racist oppressors merely for being white. The political climate at UCLA is decidedly anti-white, and this is never going to improve, but only get worse. As more white kids become aware of the discriminatory attitude at UCLA, they will avoid enrolling there and, as the percentage of whites on campus continues shrinking, the racial hatred toward them will intensify. That’s what this “diversity” editorial in the Daily Bruin actually signifies, and if any white parents in California were to ask my advice, I’d answer simply: “Get out.” Move to Colorado or Texas or anywhere else in the country, but if you care about your children, get the hell out of California at the earliest opportunity.
