If this website was truly meant to clarify misinformation, it would address specific statements, identify who said them, and provide responses rooted in fact. It does none of that.

Only one page even attempts to address a real rumor, a private comment I made four years ago. That comment was clearly identified as hearsay and later retracted. The rest of the site offers no credible examples of false claims or threats—certainly none made by Jenna. Despite this, her name and private information are featured prominently, and the accusations to justify this are simply untrue.

The truth is that the site was created shortly after Katie Mac inserted herself into another mother’s custody battle. That survivor had filed to modify her parenting plan, citing coercive control. Katie interfered by “reaching out” to the ex-husband, to offer so-called “evidence,” and even testified against the mother. The judge struck her testimony as irrelevant and ruled in favor of the mother, validating her claim of coercive control.

In this case, the timing is important. Katie Mac claims the father reached out to her and that she simply responded to a subpoena, but that is not accurate. The father’s first contact was a comment on the website breakingcodesilencelawsuit.com back in 2023. It was a time-sensitive request related to their divorce proceedings. Katie later testified that she “picked up the phone” and called him over a year later, which coincided with the mother’s petition to modify the parenting plan. When petitioning the court to allow Katie to testify, the father stated that she had sent him documents unsolicited. Katie sent several documents before a subpoena was served on her, but promised to provide the ex-husband with documents designated confidential in their federal and state cases against Jenny, which included EVERYTHING from her personal devices. He claimed those documents raised serious concerns about the mother’s sobriety, mental health, and the child’s safety. According to him, that is what prompted the subpoena.

Understandably, friends of the mother spoke out about Katie’s behavior, sharing their concerns on their personal Facebook pages. In response, Katie took to public groups with thousands of survivors and accused the mother of alcoholism and child endangerment. She claimed the motion to modify the parenting plan was simply an attempt to gain permission to drink and put the child at further risk. Because this narrative was both false and harmful, I spoke up to support the mother and clarify the facts of the case.

Claiming the backlash she received for her behavior amounts to harassment, Katie Mac created wwaspsurvivorstruth.com which primarily targets Jenna Bulis, doxxing her personal information, custody court records and private videos taken by her ex-boyfriend without her consent. Katie references several hyperbolic comments, including people wishing her suicidal to justify the existence of the website. If those things were actually said, she would have every right to be upset. But that’s not what was said. Even if that were true, it still does not explain or justify her relentless attacks on Jenna—who never made any of those comments.

Katie has seemed to be fixated on Jenna for years. She has repeatedly contacted Jenna’s ex-boyfriend, accessed and circulated court records, and defended her actions under the guise of “free speech,” with no regard for the harm it causes Jenna or her children.

Adding to that, the very name of Katie Mac’s website, WWASPSurvivorsTruth.com, suggests that its purpose is to expose or dismantle WWASP Survivors. Yet ironically, the content has nothing to do with the group itself. 

The truth is that there is no legitimate reason for this website to exist. It reflects a long-standing pattern of invasive and vindictive behavior and reignites a feud that took place years ago. Jenna deserves her privacy. She deserves peace. She deserves to heal from all of this. And our community deserves better than to have to watch us keep going back and forth about it.

None of this is true. Katie Mac has never produced a single message from either Jenna or I that supports these claims, because they do not exist. She uses out-of-context screenshots, vague language, and unrelated comments from other people with their own conflicts with her to falsely connect those statements to us.

We have always spoken firmly about accountability and survivor protection, but we have never encouraged cruelty, threats, or violence. Personally, I know what it feels like to be pushed into a severe depression due to this conflict, and I would never wish that pain on anyone.

Katie Mac continues to blur the line between disagreement and abuse, presenting herself as a victim while accusing us of things we did not do. The truth is that Jenna and others have only spoken out in response to harmful behavior, and usually in small, private spaces. Katie, on the other hand, has taken to large public groups, spreading inflammatory claims to thousands of people. In those same spaces, her supporters have circulated false rumors, made defamatory statements, and in some cases, issued threats.

We do not hold Katie personally responsible for every comment made by others, because if we did we’d have a much longer blog to write.

Instead of addressing individuals directly, she relies on vague terms like “they” and “their circle,” creating the illusion of a coordinated campaign against her. This tactic is misleading and manipulative, and it misplaces blame.

Then there are the truly bizarre claims—accusations about CIA involvement and mind control programs. Neither Jenna nor I have ever said, believed, or shared anything remotely related to these conspiracy theories. These narratives have been pulled from fringe corners of the internet, distorted beyond recognition, and used to make us seem unhinged. By linking us to outlandish ideas, Katie attempts to discredit the real and valid concerns we’ve raised about her behavior.

If Katie wants to defend herself, she should address the specific issues that have been brought to light, including the documented patterns she refers to as “old grievances.” Instead, she continues to deflect, mislead, and vilify anyone who challenges her narrative.

I do not speak for others, and others do not speak for me. I take responsibility only for my own words and actions. And If I am wrong, I will admit it and I will correct it. But I will not remain silent while false narratives are used to excuse harassment, silence survivors, and shame those who dare to speak the truth.

We raised valid concerns about the role Katie Mac played in the events that led to Jenna’s hospitalization and arrest. Those events are detailed in the Pink Slip blog, where Jenna outlined the sequence of events with clarity and supporting evidence.

We never accused her of calling the police or encouraging Jenna’s ex-boyfriend to do so. What we said was that her interference played a role in the outcome. And that is true. This includes her ongoing communication with Jenna’s ex-boyfriend and estranged stepmother, as well as her repeated insistence that Jenna accept an unsolicited, unqualified diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder. These actions, whether intentional or not, added fuel to an already volatile situation.

Our concerns were not based on rumor or speculation. We have firsthand experience, ample evidence, and a timeline that clearly outlines her involvement. Instead of acknowledging that her role was not helpful and respecting Jenna’s boundaries, she manufactured an excuse to justify launching a website that publicly doxxed Jenna’s personal information.

Holding someone responsible for actions that caused harm is not defamation, especially when the harm continues to affect both Jenna and other survivors. Asking her to stop this behavior is not harassment. It should not have happened, but at the very least, we can hope lessons could be learned from the past.

During the trademark dispute, a public document was shared privately in a group chat. It was from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. It was fully public and accessible to anyone with internet access. That document listed an address. When someone noted that it might be Katie Mac’s home, I responded, “would you please delete the trademarks you posted earlier? There’s a lot of people in this group and even though that’s public info, I still don’t think anyones addresses should be shared. Feel free to redact it… but let’s not stoop to their level.”  It was never posted publicly. It was never used to intimidate anyone. Calling this “doxxing” is not just misleading. It is a deliberate manipulation used to vilify us and justify the fact that she has doxxed us. 

See: Doxxing? Murder? – Real Convo Screenshots.

In fact, in the original lawsuit, Katie Mac posted on their website breakingcodesilence.org/lawsuit with a copy of our incorporation filings and her original complaint, which included the un-redacted home addresses of all defendants.

The truth is more complicated, and I actually defended her against these rumors. 

In a private group chat, someone brought up a police-involved death of a survivor that was experiencing a mental health crisis and claimed “they” had called the police on him. I explicitly said, “There’s no love lost between Katie and I and I am still here to defend her and say that I don’t believe she had anything to do with it. I also don’t want her address shared. While there has certainly been some issues between us, and honestly those facts are absolute facts, I’m still not going to engage or sanction any gossip or assumptions.” 

Later, I was told by someone I trust that Katie Mac had discussed the incident with them and candidly admitted to calling the police or encouraging others to do so. I was also sent screenshots from someone who had spoken to the deceased merely 2 days before he died. He blamed Katie Mac for triggering something in him. He claimed that his family was angry with her for messing with him. Still, I never made any of this public, but perhaps it is time to reveal why I believed this to be true. See: Matthew Screenshots (Note: If Katie Mac takes down her page about Matthew, I will take down this section of the blog and we can consider this issue settled.)

Regardless of what this may clarify, none of it justifies creating a public website about someone who is no longer alive to speak for themselves. The survivor in question has passed, and their story should be treated with care and respect, not used as a talking point in a smear campaign. Whatever rumors may exist, exploiting someone’s death to attack others or defend one’s own image is deeply inappropriate. Some things deserve to be handled privately. This is one of them.

To be clear: what I actually commented on was BCS’s group policy that administrators of the Facebook group would call the police on anyone they deemed to be suicidal or in crisis. That policy terrified me. As survivors, we know how harmful and traumatic police interventions can be during a mental health crisis.

I referenced the prior incident involving the death of this survivor as an example of how these actions can have devastating consequences. In doing so, I repeated something inaccurate, that Katie Mac admitted to calling the police. I have since publicly redacted and apologized for that statement.

Regardless, the larger point remains: weaponizing police responses against survivors, whether for disclosing suicidal thoughts or during heated arguments, is a dangerous and deeply irresponsible policy. It carries an enormous risk for how catastrophically wrong things can go. 

Side Note: In another case, a call reportedly tied to a Facebook comment in the BCS Facebook group resulted in police showing up at a survivor’s home at night, leaving him and his family traumatized. Katie Mac had personal issues with that individual. Whether or not she made the call herself, she held authority over the group and the organization that both created and enforced the policy.

Katie Mac shared what she claimed was a message from a man sent to her wife’s phone. The message said, “Are you okay?”. The man denied sending it and provided phone logs to prove it never happened. She used this false accusation, which had nothing to do with me, as the basis for her falsified anti-harassment petition against me. That petition was denied the same day it was filed and later dismissed because she neither served me nor showed up to the hearing. She claims she “chose not to pursue it,” but the reality is that the petition was immediately denied due to a lack of evidence that anything she alleged constituted harassment. Pursuing it beyond that point would have been a waste of her time and money.

See: KM Anti-Harassment Order Denial

We were also accused of allowing this man to doxx her wife’s phone number in our Facebook group. In reality, I was the one who removed the post immediately after it was brought to my attention that the number in his screenshot had not been redacted. Despite our issues, I would still never sanction anyone harassing or doxxing others and especially not their families in any group that I have control over.

In contrast, Katie Mac absolutely has weaponized others to harass me and my family. We have months worth of private chats to prove this, yet we have kept that out of the public eye as well. I have no intention of rehashing this, but all I can tell you is that this is pure projection.

Note: I have records of these group chats, however out of respect for the others in these conversations I will not post them unless they (or their surviving kin) consent. 

As for the claim they had to move, I witnessed her looking at new housing long before this alleged incident. As well, sources close to her at the time reported her saying that she was planning to move anyway. This was not an action taken out of fear, it was a storyline built to cast herself as a victim.

We have never called CPS on anyone.

In 2021, there was a serious incident involving a survivor experiencing a mental health crisis. The situation escalated to the point of suicidal threats and concerns about the safety of a child. It was addressed by the individual’s family and local authorities, who were already familiar with the circumstances. A welfare check was made, but Child Protective Services was never contacted, and Katie Mac is fully aware of that.

Later, a video surfaced showing this person harassing us, making threats, and filing false police and CPS reports. Katie Mac admitted to “talking (the poster) through it.” However, the individual now blames me for the video—one I had no involvement in, did not create, and never consented to being shared. I was asked (by Katie Mac) to provide information under the pretense that it was for legal purposes only, and I explicitly asked that the video not be made public. I knew that if it were posted, this person would come after me and that’s exactly what happened.

In 2023, Katie reached out to this individual, shared screenshots of our private group chats out of context, and convinced them that I had reported them to CPS. Not long after, that same person filed a false CPS report against me. The language in the report mirrored phrases Katie has used on her websites and social media, including false claims that I was involved in the BCS lawsuit. Although the report was deemed unfounded, it remains on record and is linked to my children’s names. This person has stated that Katie had shown them the screenshots and that this influenced their decision to file the report. Katie knew about their emotional history and previous behavior, including making false reports in the past. Her decision to involve them anyway was not just irresponsible it was dangerous. It put both our families at risk and exploited someone who was already struggling.

Note: I have obtained a copy of this report; however, the records explicitly state that they are not to be shared or distributed. Additionally, out of respect for my children’s privacy, I will keep the details confidential.

Jenna and I were not only co-founders of Breaking Code Silence, we were the driving force behind its growth, operations, and impact through the course of the organization’s establishment. We had not “quit” the organization; in fact, we were still actively leading major advocacy efforts, including legislative campaigns, partnerships, and educational initiatives when Katie quit and disabled our accounts. The narrative that we abandoned our roles or walked away from the mission is not only false, it was deliberately crafted to justify a hostile takeover.

Quoting my declaration from the BCS lawsuit:

“On March 14th 2021, During a meeting to discuss the election of a new CEO and the incorporation of BREAKING CODE SILENCE as a non-profit organization, KATHERINE McNAMARA exploited unauthorized access to our servers, disabled and revoked access to our emails, google drives, website, social media accounts, and downloaded and deleted sensitive data from our servers. Despite multiple requests to return our property and settle this matter amicably, KATHERINE McNAMARA and VANESSA HUGHES repeatedly refused.”

Without consulting anyone, she then rushed to incorporate Breaking Code Silence out from under us, even though our own incorporation paperwork was already in the hands of our attorneys. At the time, we were in a holding pattern, trying in good faith to finalize the structure of the organization. That process was stalled due to Katie’s insisten on several unconventional terms that we could not agree to.

The trademark in question was registered during our leadership. Jenna and I were the legal owners listed on the original application, filed while we were running Breaking Code Silence. The claim that trademark rights belonged to a “volunteer” is pure fiction. The individual they claimed used the mark, never owned the mark, never filed for it, and had no documented commercial rights to it. 

What actually happened is that he purchased breakingcodesilence.com in 2018, named after our already-established campaign, which had been in use publicly and commercially since 2014 through branding, merchandise, and widely publicized events that I personally created and led. He was later allegedly manipulated into becoming their legal pawn, meant to give their lawsuit the appearance of legitimacy. 

Eventually, this person recognized what had been done to him. He came forward and admitted that he never had a legal claim to the trademark. He informed BCS’s attorney that he had been manipulated, lied to, used, and ultimately abused by the organization’s leadership. He signed a sworn declaration in support of our motion to dismiss the case, making clear he had never used the mark nor assigned any rights to BCS. The court agreed and granted our motion to dismiss. BCS failed to present a single piece of evidence showing ownership or prior use and voluntarily dismissed the case.

See: Breaking Code Silence v. Papciak – Motion to Dismiss Granted

The lawsuit was never about trademarks or protecting intellectual property, it was about erasing our legacy, discrediting our leadership, and rewriting the history of the organization we helped build. It was a frivolous and malicious campaign designed to drain us financially, emotionally, and professionally. For us, it was about preserving the legacy of the original Breaking Code Silence Movement, which still exists on breakingcodesilence.net and the #breakingcodesilence Movement Facebook page. We spent $65,000 defending ourselves against baseless accusations; resources that could have gone toward our families, advocacy work, or supporting survivors. 

We estimate that the total legal fees over the course of the last 4 years have reached approximately $800,000. If Katie Mac would like to correct that figure, she’s welcome to, though it would mean admitting just how much money she has wasted.

To this day, the lawsuit remains the #1 Google search result for my unique legal name. That was no accident. It was a calculated act of reputational harm meant to destroy my career and credibility. As a marketing professional, I could lose clients and job opportunities because of this false and defamatory narrative claiming I stole organizational assets and committed trademark infringement.

The fact is, we never quit. We’re still out here doing the work. We have helped create both state and federal legislation, and we’ve successfully lobbied for multiple bills over the last three sessions. We remain active in this movement, even though Katie has tried to make the community feel unsafe for us.

The legacy of the Breaking Code Silence movement still lives on. Every time someone uses the hashtag #breakingcodesilence, it’s a reminder that the mission is bigger than the drama. We tried to preserve that mission. We fought for it. And no matter how long this war of attrition continues, nothing can erase the progress that was made, the awareness that was raised, or the unity we once shared.

I still believe in that potential. I still believe in the power of this movement. And I hold onto the hope that one day, we’ll return to that spirit of advocacy—when the focus was on change, and when all we saw ahead of us was the chance to do something extraordinary.

After the internal split and before the lawsuit was filed, a woman named Jen Barr, along with Jenna and I as co-owners, incorporated Breaking Code Silence as a business. It was technically designated as “For Profit” but that was only because it was faster and more practical to secure a business registration than to wait for non-profit approval. By that point, due to the chaos and conflict, we no longer intended to create a nonprofit under the Breaking Code Silence name. What we did want was to protect our rights to the campaign we created and the grassroots organization we had built from the ground up.

This was about ownership, not income. We maintained the official merchandise store primarily to demonstrate ongoing use of the mark in commerce. This was never a money-making operation. It was a legal strategy to protect our first-use rights and defend ourselves from false accusations.

Still, they weaponized this narrative to paint us as grifters. It was absurd, defamatory, and part of a broader effort to intimidate us into abandoning our own work. 

This claim is pure projection. If anyone plotted to sue anyone, it was Katie Mac.

She filed a lawsuit against us under false pretenses, lied to the court, and ultimately lost. Our motion to dismiss was granted due to their lack of evidence. Despite that outcome, she continues to insist that Jenna and I were somehow behind a grand conspiracy to bring legal action against her. In reality, the opposite is true.

At one point, there were preliminary discussions about a potential lawsuit to possibly recover attorneys’ fees related to her frivolous legal actions. These conversations were brief and exploratory, and we ultimately decided not to pursue. No settlement agreement was reached. Framing those early, private settlement discussions as some sort of coordinated plot is both dishonest and intentionally defamatory. It is a clear attempt to deflect attention from her own actions—the very actions that triggered the litigation in the first place. 

After Katie Mac took over Breaking Code Silence from its original team, she eventually had a falling out with the new board of the nonprofit. That same organization later sued her for allegedly violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The claims against her included accusations that she de-indexed the group’s website, revoked access to its social media accounts, interfered with donor relationships, and refused to return the organization’s intellectual property. The lawsuit pointed to a clear pattern of sabotage, mirroring what she had already done to us. It was history repeating itself.

In response, Katie Mac launched BreakingCodeSilenceLawsuit.com intended to create sympathy and portray herself as the victim of malicious prosecution (oh, the irony) where she falsely claimed that Jenna and I conspired to sue her. In official court filings, she accused us of plotting to de-index the website to frame her for hacking and sue her in an effort to trigger her liability insurance. None of these accusations are true.

We were not involved in any plan to de-index the site or initiate litigation. We were not involved in the computer fraud case at all. I was not a plaintiff. I was not part of the legal team. I was only subpoenaed as a witness and gave truthful testimony about what little I knew. 

Still, Katie Mac continues to imply we were secretly behind that lawsuit. She is now threatening to file a Malicious Prosecution case against the nonprofit and strongly suggests that Jenna and I will be added to it. This would be yet another baseless and expensive lawsuit meant to damage our reputations and drain our resources. 

If anyone should be held accountable for malicious prosecution, it is Katie Mac. She used the legal system as a weapon to silence us, distract from her own actions, and justify the damage she caused. She made false claims, wasted time and resources, and forced us to defend ourselves against a lawsuit that never should have happened. That is not justice. That is an abuse of process.

There was no conspiracy. No hidden agenda. No personal vendetta. What exists is a person unwilling to accept responsibility for her actions, trying to rewrite history because the truth reflects poorly on her.

Read more about this “Plot to Sue” on my “Plot Twist” blog.

After what happened with Breaking Code Silence, I couldn’t shake the feeling that history might repeat itself. I had already watched one organization I helped build get hijacked from the inside. I wasn’t going to let that happen again, especially not to WWASP Survivors.

After Katie Mac made her move against BCS, I acted quickly to protect WWASP Survivors. I removed her admin access. I had every reason to believe she would try to take over the WS group just like she had taken over BCS.

Bill Boyles, WWASP Survivors co-founder and my partner in TTI activism over the last two decades, had grown increasingly close to Katie Mac over the last few years. After I removed her, he called me in a rage. He shouted, “If you remove Katie, you might as well remove me too.” I tried to explain everything. I told him about the conflict of interest, the ultimatum she gave us, and how she took over our accounts. None of it seemed to matter. 

Reluctantly, I stepped back from the group on one condition. Katie Mac would not be allowed back in. That boundary was clear. But it was ignored. Because of this, I was removed from the admin chat and she was added right back in.

Bill believes this came down to semantics. That my request was that she not be made admin, but he essentially made her an honorary admin by including her in the admin chat. Which also showed his clear preference for her, while he showed me a total lack of support during this time.

Soon after that, I received a cease-and-desist attached with private conversations I had with Bill and others from the WS mod team claiming those private discussions amounted to defamation. They weren’t just shared with her. They were used as ammunition against me, for no other reason besides the fact that I told them the truth about what she did. It became painfully clear that those I had trusted were working with her against me.

At that point, I had to accept the truth. Bill wasn’t neutral. He knew what she was planning, and he said nothing. After years of friendship and shared mission, he chose to side with her and justify her actions. And in doing so, he helped push me out of a group I had poured over a decade of my life into. He also joined the board of BCS and, presumably, voted to use the organization to sue me. 

The day I received BCS’ cease and desist, I removed everyone involved. I still don’t understand how any of them are shocked that I kicked them out of a group I created when they were actively involved in suing me. 

And no, I don’t regret it.

The truth is, for many years WWASP Survivors had a reputation for infighting. It was a hard place to be vulnerable. Disagreements would erupt, and too often it was the admins and moderators themselves who piled on. Survivors were silenced, and anyone who didn’t fall in line was banned.

That wasn’t what I had envisioned when I created the group. It was, however, my responsibility to protect that space from harm in the wake of everything that had just happened.

Now, four years later, WWASP Survivors is something different. It’s calmer. Safer. Supportive. The energy has shifted. Survivors come to share their stories, seek connection, and heal. They are met with compassion, not judgment.

In contrast, the groups now run by those former admins have become cesspools of drama and division. They are frequently used to spread misinformation and give Katie Mac a platform to attack people and other organizations. The primary group she uses to defame Jenna and I is, ironically, the same group we originally managed for Breaking Code Silence, one that was taken over and rebranded.

Looking back, I know I made the right choice. I protected WWASP Survivors from becoming that kind of space. And I will never apologize for doing what was necessary to keep it safe.

Directly after the old admins were removed, a coordinated attack on the WWASP Survivors group was carried out by the new group formed by the former admins, in an effort to convince our members to leave the group and join theirs. In order to deflect from the real reason the admins were removed and instead cast us in a negative light, they accused us all of being racist.

None of these claims were made in good faith. They were weapons used to discredit us, and the harm fell hardest on survivors of color in our community.

Because of this manufactured narrative, our group was suddenly flooded with accusations of racism. These were fueled entirely by the misinformation being spread by Katie Mac and members of her echo chamber. The result was a deep and painful rift. Long-standing relationships were fractured. Many members left. The damage was intentional and coordinated. This was not about justice or accountability. It was retaliation.

Adding to that, the very name of Katie Mac’s website, WWASPSurvivorsTruth.com, suggests that its purpose is to expose or dismantle WWASP Survivors. Yet ironically, the content has nothing to do with the group itself.