How did this showering claim about Biden originate and who spread it?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The “showering” claim traces back to passages in Ashley Biden’s stolen personal diary that were published and circulated by right‑leaning outlets and social accounts; fact‑checking and court filings have confirmed the diary’s existence and that she wrote about "not appropriate" showers with her father, leading Snopes to revise its rating to True based on Ashley Biden’s own court‑submitted letter [1]. Project Veritas, The National File and amplifying accounts on X/Twitter played key roles in acquiring or spreading related materials, while mainstream outlets later reported legal actions around the diary theft and publication [1].
1. How the allegation first surfaced: a leaked diary and partisan publication
Reporting shows the earliest public spread centered on what publishers said was Ashley Biden’s personal journal; Project Veritas possessed materials and audio linked to that effort, but it was the right‑wing blog The National File that published what it called a “complete diary” in October 2020, shortly before the election — and various right‑leaning social accounts then amplified snippets and an old phone call recording [1].
2. Evidence chain that made the claim stick: court filings and a letter from Ashley Biden
Independent fact‑checking updated its view after court documents and Ashley Biden’s written testimony appeared in legal proceedings concerning the theft and sale of the diary. Snopes revised a prior “Unproven” rating to “True” when The New York Times published a letter from Ashley Biden used in court, and when published court materials showed her authorship and described the document’s contents [1].
3. Who handled and circulated the materials: Project Veritas, sellers and social amplifiers
Project Veritas figures in the reporting as having obtained audio and other evidence suggesting they had the diary; they did not immediately publish it. Instead, a mix of actors — two Florida residents later pleaded guilty in a scheme to sell the journal, and The National File posted the diary copy online — after which right‑wing accounts on X/Twitter repeatedly shared the material and the phone call audio [1].
4. Media ecosystem and partisan incentives that boosted the narrative
Right‑of‑center outlets and social accounts had immediate incentive to publicize material that could damage Joe Biden politically; Project Veritas and The National File are explicitly named in the reporting as central to acquisition and publication. The timing — just before the 2020 presidential election — and the pattern of selective excerpting on social platforms magnified the story’s reach [1].
5. What the published passages actually say — and what remains unclear
Available reporting indicates the diary contains a January 2019 entry in which Ashley Biden described showering with her father and characterized it as “not appropriate” or a factor in later sexual struggles; that phrasing is the basis for the shorthand “showering” claim widely repeated online [2] [1]. Available sources do not mention fuller context from the diary beyond what court documents and the letter disclosed [1].
6. Disputes, legal fallout and official responses
Legal records show two Florida residents pleaded guilty in a scheme to steal and sell the diary, and Ashley Biden submitted a letter as part of those proceedings expressing distress at the theft and public release [1] [2]. Project Veritas pursued legal claims about source protection that courts rejected in related litigation, indicating contested custody and publication debates around the materials [2].
7. How to read competing claims and remaining limits in reporting
The source material — private journal entries — is authenticated in court filings and by Ashley Biden’s own submitted writings, which changed how fact‑checkers treated the claim [1]. But the leap from a private, reflective diary entry to broad public inferences about criminal behavior is not addressed fully in the available reporting; many outlets and social actors framed the passages with partisan intent [1]. Available sources do not mention independent forensic publication of the full diary by mainstream newsrooms beyond court documents and the National File’s copy [1].
8. Bottom line for readers
The origin of the showering claim is traceable: it started in Ashley Biden’s private diary, entered public circulation via Project Veritas‑linked materials and a publication by The National File, and was amplified by right‑leaning social media accounts; subsequent court documents and Ashley Biden’s own letter prompted fact‑checkers to mark the diary’s existence as confirmed [1]. Readers should note the difference between proven authorship of a diary passage and interpretive claims about intent or criminality, which available reporting does not resolve [1].