California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter is again under public scrutiny this week after the release of a video showing her angrily reprimanding a staff member during a 2021 virtual meeting with U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm.

The footage, obtained by Politico and circulated Wednesday, shows Porter—then a member of Congress—snapping at a staffer who briefly walked into her camera frame.

“Get out of my f—ing shot!” Porter yells in the clip. “You were in my shot before that. Stay out of my shot.”

The exchange was removed from the Department of Energy’s edited version of the online event, which focused on climate and energy policy.

Porter’s campaign has not publicly commented on the resurfaced footage, and Fox News Digital reported Wednesday that a request for response went unanswered.

A 2021 Moment Resurfaces in 2025

The incident dates back more than three years, when Porter was serving her second term in the U.S. House and participating in a virtual conversation with Granholm during the height of pandemic-era remote events. Sources told Politico that the unedited recording circulated internally at the time but was never released.

Its reappearance now—amid Porter’s high-profile run for California governor—has renewed criticism from opponents who accuse her of mistreating staff and clashing with journalists.

Recent Tensions With Reporters

The video surfaced only days after a separate moment involving Porter went viral: a contentious interview with CBS California reporter Julie Watts about the state’s upcoming gubernatorial race.

In that interview, Watts asked Porter what she would say to “the 40 percent of California voters you’ll need in order to win who voted for Trump.”

Porter interrupted. “How would I need them in order to win, ma’am?”

When Watts replied, “Unless you think you’re going to get 60 percent of the vote,” the exchange grew tense. Porter laughed and insisted she was being treated differently from other candidates.

After several follow-ups, Porter attempted to end the interview:

“I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative,” she said, before removing her microphone. “Nope, not like this I’m not— not with seven follow-ups to every single question you ask.”

When Watts pointed out that every other candidate had answered the same question, Porter responded, “I don’t care.”

The clip, aired later that day, drew millions of views online and prompted new discussions about the candidate’s combative streak.

A Pattern or an Outlier?

Porter, 51, first gained national attention as a consumer-protection law professor who used whiteboards and pointed questioning in congressional hearings to grill corporate executives and cabinet officials. Admirers call her a tough, data-driven reformer; critics describe her as abrasive.

The resurfaced staffer clip—and the viral CBS interview—have added fuel to a narrative her opponents have pushed since she entered the governor’s race earlier this year: that Porter’s sharpness behind the microphone can shade into volatility.

Her allies argue that such scrutiny is unevenly applied. “Katie’s directness has always been part of her appeal,” said one longtime Democratic strategist not formally connected to her campaign. “If she were a man raising her voice in a workplace moment, people would call it leadership.”

Still, the optics are difficult for a candidate trying to frame herself as an empathetic reformer running to succeed Governor Gavin Newsom.

Editing and Transparency Questions

Politico reported that the Department of Energy’s official upload of the 2021 event omitted the staffer exchange entirely, though the raw footage later circulated among congressional staff. Neither DOE officials nor the Granholm team have explained the edit, which is common practice for publicly released webinars but has now become a talking point for critics questioning transparency.

Republican consultants have seized on the video as evidence of what they call Porter’s “temper problem.” Democratic operatives, meanwhile, have urged restraint, noting that workplace outbursts—while never ideal—are hardly unique in high-pressure political offices.

Porter’s Position in the Governor’s Race

Porter remains a leading contender in California’s 2026 gubernatorial field, which also includes Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and several Republican hopefuls. Polls this month from UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies show her near the top of a crowded Democratic primary but with rising unfavorable ratings.

Analysts say how she handles the controversy could shape early impressions of her leadership style.

“California voters have seen Porter as an effective watchdog,” said political scientist Dan Schnur, a former state ethics official who now teaches at USC. “What they haven’t seen is how she manages people. This incident gives her critics an opening.”

Silence From the Campaign

As of Thursday afternoon, Porter’s campaign had not released a statement or apology regarding the 2021 clip. In the past, she has brushed off similar criticisms, saying she holds herself and her staff to high standards.

During her 2022 Senate campaign (which she suspended earlier this year to enter the governor’s race), former staff members described her as demanding but “mission-driven.” An internal review by the House Office of Congressional Ethics found no violations of workplace policy.

Political observers expect her team to address the incident eventually, if only to prevent it from overshadowing her policy agenda on housing, climate, and education.

Late-Campaign Scrutiny

With California’s open-primary election still months away, the controversy may fade—but it underscores how little room candidates now have for missteps in the age of constant digital archiving.

Political historian Allan Lichtman notes that “the ubiquity of cameras means the shelf life of any outburst is indefinite.” For Porter, a polished debater used to the spotlight, the challenge is less about surviving the clip than about reframing the conversation.

“She can either ignore it and hope it passes,” Lichtman said, “or confront it directly and turn it into a lesson about stress, leadership, and accountability.”

Broader Reflections on Candidate Conduct

The Porter episode also renews debate about the expectations placed on politicians—especially women—regarding tone and temperament.

While her language in the video was clearly inappropriate for a workplace setting, some observers argue that the outrage risks feeding a double standard. “Male candidates are lauded for passion or assertiveness,” said communications scholar Kathleen Hall Jamieson. “Women expressing the same intensity are often labeled ‘angry.’”

Still, Jamieson added, “there’s a difference between assertive and disrespectful. The voters will decide which category this moment falls into.”

What Happens Next

The Rock Hall–style drip of campaign revelations shows no sign of slowing. Porter’s rivals are already referencing the clip at fundraisers and on social media, while her supporters urge the campaign to pivot back to policy.

Whether this moment lingers may depend on how Porter herself responds when she next faces reporters. If she laughs it off or issues a straightforward apology, analysts say the story could fade. If she doubles down, it risks reinforcing the perception of thin-skinned defensiveness that the CBS interview suggested.

For now, the footage stands as a reminder of modern politics’ unforgiving microscope: one stray remark on a forgotten Zoom call can resurface years later, reshaping a race in real time.

As one Democratic consultant put it, “In 2025, every hot mic is a time bomb.”