Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What is the origin of the Ashley Biden shower allegation?
Executive summary
The allegation traces to pages of a personal diary that came to public attention after it was stolen and offered for sale; the diary includes a line saying “showers w/my dad (probably not appropriate),” and Project Veritas is reported to have paid about $40,000 for the document [1]. Reporting and fact-checkers say the diary was in circulation by 2020, was later authenticated as belonging to Ashley Biden in some reporting, but key sensational quotations circulating online (for example, about being “afraid of him coming in the shower”) have not been substantiated by available evidence [2] [3] [1].
1. How the allegation first surfaced — a stolen diary and media attention
The underlying item is a private diary that, according to news accounts, was stolen from an apartment and later offered to third parties; reporting and court documents connect that document to Ashley Biden and show it entered the marketplace ahead of the 2020 election [2] [1]. Project Veritas testified in court that it paid roughly $40,000 for what it described as the diary, and media outlets reported that the document had been in the possession of individuals who moved into an apartment previously occupied by Ashley Biden [2] [1].
2. What the diary actually says — the passage that circulated
Fact-checkers and reporting note that one page of the diary contains a fragmentary line that was widely publicized: “showers w/my dad (probably not appropriate).” That passage is documented in the reporting and in reviews of the leaked pages [1] [4]. Multiple outlets have focused on that specific phrasing as the factual nucleus of the claim rather than more lurid or detailed versions that circulated online [1] [3].
3. Circulation, distortion, and amplified claims on social media
After the diary pages leaked, social media amplified a range of versions — some more explicit than the diary page itself. Fact-checkers specifically flagged widely shared memes and posts that attributed a line about being “so afraid of him coming in the shower” to Ashley Biden; Snopes rated that particular quote “Unfounded” because they could find no evidence that the sentence existed in the diary or in available reporting [3]. PolitiFact similarly warned that official statements (for example, an FBI announcement about stolen property) did not confirm any of the salacious contents being true [5].
4. Authentication, admission, and responses
Reporting indicates that the diary was acknowledged as belonging to Ashley Biden in a letter to The New York Times in April 2024, and Wikipedia also summarizes that she acknowledged the diary while saying her writings had been “constantly distorted and manipulated” [4]. Snopes and other fact-checkers reviewed supporting materials and court testimony suggesting Project Veritas had obtained the document, but they caution against conflating the document’s existence with verification of every specific social-media claim tied to it [2] [1].
5. What fact-checkers say — verified, unverified, and unfounded elements
Fact-checking outlets separate three things: (A) the diary’s existence and provenance (reported and litigated), (B) the short, specific diary line “showers w/my dad (probably not appropriate)” (reported in the diary pages), and (C) expanded, more explicit quotes circulating online (not found in available evidence). Snopes documents (B) as present in the publicized pages while labeling (C) — the “afraid of him coming in the shower” phrasing — as unfounded because they could not locate it in the diary or verified reporting [1] [3]. PolitiFact cautions that FBI comments about a theft case did not confirm diary contents [5].
6. Competing narratives and the role of partisan amplification
Different outlets and commentators have used the diary to push divergent narratives: some insist the pages show troubling behavior and demand further answers, while others and fact-checkers stress that the leaked, fragmentary writing has been widely distorted and that specific, widely shared sensational sentences lack evidence [4] [3]. Reporting about Project Veritas’s purchase and the criminal case against people who sold the diary shows how intermediaries and political operators can influence which fragments reach the public and how they are framed [2] [1].
7. Limitations of the available reporting and what remains unanswered
Available sources document the diary’s circulation, a short phrase about “showers” appearing on a publicized page, and efforts by outlets to verify or debunk amplified claims, but they do not provide full, unredacted diary text to settle every contested excerpt; fact-checkers explicitly note where specific quotations are not supported by the material they reviewed [1] [3]. If you are seeking a definitive account of events alleged in fragmentary diary lines, available reporting does not provide that level of detail [3].
Conclusion: The origin of the “Ashley Biden shower” allegation lies in a stolen diary that entered the public sphere and was bought and circulated by third parties; a short diary fragment referencing “showers w/my dad (probably not appropriate)” is corroborated in reporting, while more explicit quotes widely shared online have been declared unfounded by fact-checkers [1] [3] [2].