Despite Democrats and the media’s hasty designation of the assault on Paul Pelosi as an instance of political violence, authorities have not yet stated a motive. Here’s the hammer assault on Paul Pelosi explained.
As speculations circulate on social media, additional information about the hammer assault on Paul Pelosi, husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, has surfaced, including the startling revelation that Pelosi referred to his assailant as a “friend” when phoning police.
Paul Joseph Watson describes everything in five words: “it seems a bit odd…”
An updated version of the incident, as published by the Los Angeles Times and other media sites quoting police sources, is provided below, along with some insight on rumors that have been circulating about it.
Watch the video below:
Subscribe to GreatGameIndia
DePape reportedly entered the residence and confronted Pelosi after bursting through a back door in the early hours of Friday morning.
Pelosi gave DePape his excuse that he had to go to the restroom. There, at around 2:30 in the morning, he secretly dialed 911. According to sources cited by Politico, the phone had been charging there.
The San Francisco Police dispatcher reported what Pelosi stated when directing the police response, making reference to him as “RP,” which is police lingo for “reporting party”:
Police officers arrived at the Pelosi residence in little under 2 minutes, which is a response time that is far from common in modern American cities. Someone, whose identity is unknown, answered the door when they knocked.
The two males were seen by the police, each with one hand holding a single hammer, and they were each told to drop it. Pelosi was struck with it by DePape as soon as he took it away. DePape was tackled by the police, who then arrested him.
The LA Times’ portrayal of Pelosi’s 911 call contains some inconsistencies. According to the Times, Pelosi “tricked” DePape and initiated a secret phone call, but in the same item says “officials believe Pelosi was intentionally giving coded information because the intruder knew Pelosi was on the phone.”
Perhaps the call began covertly, but DePape overheard him, or Pelosi was suspicious of it. Keeping that in mind, it is possible Pelosi was not being genuine when he called DePape a “friend,” but was instead attempting to calm the supposedly insane DePape, who had been characterized as a “psychotic, homeless addict estranged from his nudist lover and their children” – and who “talks to angels.”
This may also help to explain why the dispatcher reported Pelosi as sounding “somewhat confused.” if he was being monitored or was afraid of it. Chief Bill Scott of the San Francisco Police Department stated at a press conference on Friday that Pelosi’s request for assistance required dispatcher Heather Grimes to read between the lines:
DePape is now infamous for yelling “Where is Nancy? Where is Nancy?” It is unclear when.
Based on a statement from Nancy Pelosi’s office, Pelosi needed surgery to “repair a skull fracture, and serious injuries to his right arm and hands.”
There are claims on social media that DePape was in his underwear when police came, as well as others that he and Pelosi were both in their underwear.
According to “sources,” San Francisco Fox affiliate KTVU reported on Friday that DePape was in his underwear. KTVU, on the other hand, has reversed that assertion and put a correction at the bottom of the article: “An earlier version of this story misstated what clothing the suspect was wearing when officers found him.”
However, there is a lot of underwear chatter on Twitter and other platforms, as well as some misinterpreting an early SFPD statement to imply that both Pelosi and DePape were holding hammers. Dinesh D’Souza, swept up in the frenzy, is one of those who lost reputation points over the weekend, despite amassing tens of thousands of likes:
Last but not least, despite Democrats and the media’s hasty designation of the assault as an instance of political violence, authorities have not stated a motive.
After clearing everything up, it should be noted that none of it prevented Hillary Clinton from joining the bandwagon and asserting that the source must have been a MAGA or QAnon conspiracy theorist, to which Elon Musk immediately responded…
Which he has subsequently removed.
However, Glenn Greenwald brings up the major talking point in the media.
Maybe Musk should have tweeted Michael Shellenberger’s viewpoint instead.
Regardless of fact or conspiracy, the ability to have a “conversation” without it resulting in a #InstaBan seems like a significant step towards the reinstatement of free speech… and the ability for Americans to choose their own opinions rather than being forced into one narrative uber alles.