Paul pelosi at a gay bar

Based on factual reporting, incorporates the expertise of the journalist and may offer interpretations and conclusions. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. An intruder barges into the house of the paul who is second in line to the presidency, and strikes her year-old husband with a hammer.

Yet millions of people—including politicians, public figures, and the richest man in the world—seemingly believe that the incident was not a political attack at all, but a drunken lover's quarrel. Although the outlandish narratives about the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi 's husband Paul Pelosi have generated widespread attention, the tactics used to spread them have generally been overlooked.

A NewsGuard analysis of false narratives related to the incident reveals how the Paul Pelosi conspiracy went from fringe pelosi mainstream in a matter of days, enabled by the limited information and unintentional misreporting that often accompany developing news stories, and dramatically amplified by a cast of malign actors taking advantage of social media's speed and reach.

These included right-wing personalities who were seeking to shift the narrative away from the notion that the attack was an act of political violence fueled by the rhetoric of the right. NewsGuard identified four main false claims that converged into the unfounded narrative that Pelosi and the assailant, David DePape, were secretly involved in an intimate relationship: that DePape was in his underwear when the police arrived at the scene; that Pelosi and DePape were friends; that a third person was inside the house but did not do anything to stop or report the incident; and that the pattern of the shattered glass from the house's rear door could only have been produced by someone breaking it from the inside.

Tracing how some of these claims originated and spread so widely across the Internet provides insights into the workings of our current information ecosystem, and how it can be so easily exploited to define breaking news stories before the stories are fully understood—or at least to muddy the waters for the people who turn to certain outlets and social media accounts for their news.

One major thread of misinformation about the attack emerged from an innocent error by a mainstream news organization—the San Francisco-based Fox affiliate KTVU—which, two hours after news of the attack broke, reported that DePape was arrested in his underwear. The article was corrected approximately two hours later, as there was no evidence that DePape was wearing only underwear.

The claim was refuted three days later in federal charging documentswhich included testimony from DePape confessing to the break-in and said that DePape was wearing shorts with pockets. But the damage had already been done. NewsGuard identified at least 70 Facebook posts, tweets, TikTok videos, and articles, combined, all of which cited KTVU, falsely claiming that DePape was only wearing underwear during the attack—supposedly evidence that the men were involved in an intimate relationship.

This claim received a significant boost on Oct. Other right-wing personalities played a major role in boosting the gay, including commentator Dinesh D'Souza, bar posted four tweets mentioning that DePape had been wearing underwear. As a result, even five days after the KTVU article had been corrected, and two days after prosecutors said that DePape confessed to the political nature of the attack, the false underwear claim continued to thrive on social media, illustrating the lasting influence of falsehoods when they are amplified by influencers.

Elon Musk, others amplify conspiracy theory about Paul Pelosi attack

It also demonstrates the limitations of corrections, which, despite being intended to clarify and inform, are often entirely ignored by those who seek to muddy and misinform. The false claim that there was a third person inside the Pelosi household during the attack did not originate from established news organizations.

Rather, it was based on misreporting of an official statement, which was seized on by conspiracists. This highlights one of the most common tactics used by purveyors of misinformation: selectively citing authoritative sources when it supports their agenda. The falsehood about a third person traces its roots to an Oct. But when Politico and NBC News fumbled the details of who was inside the house, conspiracy theorists—who often are disparaging of established media outlets—were quick to cite them.

An Oct. Politico promptly issued a correction to the initial story, clarifying that "there were only two people inside the Pelosi home when police arrived. Similarly, in an Oct. Nevertheless, an Oct. This is all over the Internet