Jump to content

Paul Pelosi: Who is spreading false claims about attack on Nancy Pelosi's husband?


Recommended Posts

Posted
  •  
San Francisco Police and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents work outside the home of US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi after her husband Paul Pelosi was attacked by a home invader early in the morning in San Francisco, California, USA, 28 October 2022Image source, EPA
By Shayan Sardarizadeh
BBC Monitoring
 

Paul Pelosi, the husband of US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was attacked by a hammer-wielding intruder at the couple's San Francisco home in the early hours of Friday.

 

Within hours of the attack, a series of unsubstantiated claims began circulating in fringe far-right circles that contradicted the official police account of how the attack unfolded.

 

Those misleading claims have since gone viral after being amplified by new Twitter chief Elon Musk and a number of conservative influencers.

https://www.bbc.com/news/63477452

BBC.jpg

Posted

 

Fact Check-Attack on Paul Pelosi did not involve third person, say officials

 

law enforcement officials told Reuters that Paul Pelosi and the suspect, David DePape, were the only two people at the Pelosi residence when police responded.

 

One Facebook user wrote, “A third person, at the Pelosi’s opened the door for the cops? Getting weirder & weirder” (here)....

 

“We want to make it clear that there were only two people in the home at the time that the police arrived, Mister Pelosi and the suspect,” Jenkins said. “There was no third person present.”

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pelosi-depape-thirdperson/fact-check-attack-on-paul-pelosi-did-not-involve-third-person-say-officials-idUSL1N31X1VI

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
6 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

 

Who opened the door for police? Real easy question but so far no one can answer it logically. Apparently what Rick Scott the SF Chief of Police had to say was false.

  • Haha 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Who opened the door for police? Real easy question but so far no one can answer it logically. Apparently what Rick Scott the SF Chief of Police had to say was false.

It seems like they are saying the 82 year old Pelosi did it with one hand, while grappling with a hammer with someone half his age with the other hand? Is that the official line? Genuine question...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Agreed. 

This is why the GOP and the MAGA brigade are so messed up. They'd rather believe whatever nonsense scenarios questions the events (to own the liberals of course) than the actual video and eye-witness eveidence that clearly shows what happened. It's beyond inane. 

Actually, some people just want the truth. I don't believe you need to be a Republican or MAGA to want the truth (I am neither, I'm not even American). If the truth is as is it currently being portrayed then that's fine, "if" it's the truth. Maybe law enforcement in California really does attend emergency home invasions and then watches on as the attacker fractures the skull of the 82 year old victim. Based on what I know of the extremely aggressive American policing style it seems unlikely but if that's the case, the cops need to be brought to account for such a pathetic response. If the account is true, Pelosi should be suing them for millions for gross negligence. 

 

The accounts given just seem completely unrealistic to me. I'd like to see what really happened. Hopefully we'll see the actual CCTV and bodycam video (minus any graphic footage of course). If I was Pelosi, I'd also want to put these "silly" rumours to bed (assuming that's what they are) and would support the videos being released. If they refuse to release the footage, naturally the rumours will continue.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

It makes perfect sense that PP opened the door for police and then went for the hammer instead of letting police handle it.

Mr Pelosi is certainly fortunate. I think some violent home invaders bent on murder would not be letting the victim have a timeout to visit the bathroom, and again would probably not let the victim free to open the door to the police. 

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Certainly fail me after reading your post. 
 

From the OP

 

”There is no evidence in any of the police accounts that a third person was either in the house or involved in the attack.”

 

 

The actual criminal complaint is a factual document. If the facts are to be known, I suggest reading the official document not some MSM outlets take on the story.

  • Like 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Absolutely not true....especially among the MAGA types.  These people have zero interest in the truth.  They just want to hear something that they can agree with. 

You do realize that "some people" does not necessarily include the MAGA types? Or did you just want some way of shoehorning the word MAGA into a post?

 

I repeat, some people just want the truth, myself included. Hence I would like to see the CCTV and bodycam footage.

 

By the way I am British and thus have a very limited interest in America being 'great again'. Maybe when they sign the trade deal with the UK I would have a passing interest, but no more than that.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

The actual criminal complaint is a factual document. If the facts are to be known, I suggest reading the official document not some MSM outlets take on the story.

I suggest you are desperately seeking a conspiracy theory to explain away the truth that there was no third person.

Edited by Bluespunk
Posted
47 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Actually, some people just want the truth. I don't believe you need to be a Republican or MAGA to want the truth (I am neither, I'm not even American). If the truth is as is it currently being portrayed then that's fine, "if" it's the truth. Maybe law enforcement in California really does attend emergency home invasions and then watches on as the attacker fractures the skull of the 82 year old victim. Based on what I know of the extremely aggressive American policing style it seems unlikely but if that's the case, the cops need to be brought to account for such a pathetic response. If the account is true, Pelosi should be suing them for millions for gross negligence. 

 

The accounts given just seem completely unrealistic to me. I'd like to see what really happened. Hopefully we'll see the actual CCTV and bodycam video (minus any graphic footage of course). If I was Pelosi, I'd also want to put these "silly" rumours to bed (assuming that's what they are) and would support the videos being released. If they refuse to release the footage, naturally the rumours will continue.

I bet my bottom dollar that you will have somethng to spin even after the actual CCTV, bodycam and the audio 911 call are released. Anyone disagree?

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

I bet my bottom dollar that you will have somethng to spin even after the actual CCTV, bodycam and the audio 911 call are released. Anyone disagree?

Me, I find it interesting that some can read the same reports I read and think, Looks good to me. Why does it matter who opened the door? It's all in the "report"  There's nothing suspicious here.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

And how many criminal cases do you know of that let you see the 'CCTV and bodycam footage' this early in the investigation? The police have zero duty to prove what they say to you or anybody for that matter other than a court of law but I think you can be pretty sure that in a high profile case such as this they will be scrupulous in what they say and do. If they are saying there was only 2 people, then there was only two people. 

You ask 'The accounts given just seem completely unrealistic to me. I'd like to see what really happened'. Again, why would you rather say that than say 'well, the police, witness statements and CCTV seem to back up a particular story, that seems good enough for me'.

All conspiracy theories rely on some small area that advocates cling to desperately (shadows on the moon meaning no moon landing; a magic bullet with JFK; building 7 on 9/11) and it's VERY easy to simply come up with the 'but, I'm only asking' when we all know that 'just asking' is loaded with connotations.

You insist you have no skin in the game but rather than hear what others are pointing out to you, you are still insisting on 'just wanting the truth'. Well the truth is there, documented, recorded and verified. Will you now say that's good enough for you?

The CCTV backs it up? Really? When did you see it?

 

The truth is documented, recorded and verified? Please send me links, I'd love to see that.

 

I can wait for the trial, no biggie. It's a matter of interest to me, nothing more. I am not obsessed with American politics or Trump like so many on here.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...