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.
Has Joe Biden or Ashley Biden addressed the shower allegation?
Executive Summary
Ashley Biden has publicly acknowledged the authenticity of entries from her personal diary in a court filing, and in that letter she said passages published online— including references to “showers with dad” described as “probably not appropriate”—were hers but had been misinterpreted; Joe Biden has not issued a direct public response to that specific shower allegation [1] [2] [3]. Multiple fact-checks and reporting note the diary was stolen and published, the FBI did not verify diary contents in public statements tied to prosecution records, and some coverage does not reference the shower passage at all, leaving factual gaps and room for partisan framing [4] [5] [6].
1. What Ashley Biden Actually Said in Court — A Rare Direct Acknowledgment
Ashley Biden addressed material from her personal journal in a sentencing-related letter filed in New York courts, where she confirmed the diary’s authenticity and wrote that passages published online were hers but had been taken out of context and mischaracterized; the filing was presented as part of proceedings against individuals convicted of stealing and selling personal items [2] [3]. The court filing framed the publication as an intrusion and emphasized trauma from the theft, and Ashley’s language acknowledged the specific wording about showers while contesting interpretations that alleged criminal misconduct or intent, making this a limited but notable direct acknowledgment from the family member most closely connected to the document [1] [7]. Reporting around this filing dates primarily to May 2024 in multiple accounts, which is the clearest public moment when Ashley addressed the matter in official court papers [2] [3].
2. Joe Biden’s Public Silence on the Specific Shower Claim — Absence of a Direct Denial
Across the materials reviewed, Joe Biden has not publicly responded to the specific shower allegation appearing in the diary excerpts; mainstream reporting and fact-checks consistently show no direct statement from the president addressing that line in Ashley’s journal [1] [7] [6]. Coverage notes routine family defenses and denials offered by surrogates in other contexts but does not record a presidential statement denying, confirming, or elaborating on those diary passages, so evaluating the claim relies primarily on Ashley’s court letter and how media and fact-checkers interpret the leaked excerpts rather than an explicit presidential rebuttal [1] [4]. The absence of a direct presidential comment has allowed varied interpretations by political actors and media outlets since the diary’s publication.
3. Law-Enforcement and Verification Limits — What the FBI and Courts Did and Did Not Say
Public reporting on related criminal prosecutions involving theft and sale of personal items linked to the Biden family notes the FBI and prosecutors did not publicly verify the diary’s contents in formal statements tied to plea deals or indictments; the official legal filings focused on the theft and trafficking of property rather than on validating journal passages [4]. Fact-check organizations and news outlets emphasize that law enforcement actions addressed the criminal conduct of sellers, not the substantive truth of personal recollections, leaving authentication and interpretation of diary entries primarily to Ashley’s own admission in court papers and to journalistic verification rather than to public forensic confirmation by federal agencies [7] [3]. This gap matters because it means independent verification of context and intent around the shower line remained limited in public records.
4. How Media and Fact-Checkers Framed the Claim — Consensus and Divergence
Fact-check outlets and major news organizations produced multiple pieces between May 2024 and later months that converge on a few points: the diary was stolen and published, Ashley Biden acknowledged the journal’s authenticity in court papers, and reporters could not find a presidential response to the shower phrasing; however, outlets diverge on emphasis—some foreground Ashley’s admission as confirmation of the line’s provenance, others highlight her contention that words were misinterpreted, and some pieces downplay or omit the shower detail entirely depending on editorial choices [1] [8] [7] [9]. These differences reflect editorial judgments and, at times, partisan agendas: outlets skeptical of the Biden family tended to stress the content as corroboration, while others stressed legal and contextual limits and the lack of independent forensic verification [7] [5].
5. The Big Picture — Evidence, Limits, and What Remains Unresolved
The verifiable facts are narrow and consistent: Ashley Biden admitted the diary passages were hers in a May 2024 court filing and called the public presentation of those passages a misinterpretation; the FBI and prosecutors handling theft prosecutions did not publicly validate diary contents; and Joe Biden has not publicly addressed the shower allegation directly [2] [4] [3]. What remains unresolved in public records is fuller documentary context, independent forensic confirmation of every published entry, and any direct comment from the president; these gaps have allowed political actors to advance conflicting narratives, making careful distinction between what is documented and how it has been framed essential for readers assessing the claim [1] [5].