Was Ashley Biden's diary changed
Executive summary
Public reporting establishes that a personal journal belonging to Ashley Biden was stolen in 2020, sold to conservative operatives and portions were published online, and Ashley Biden herself confirmed the diary’s existence in a court letter; however, there is no public, verifiable forensic evidence in the cited reporting proving that the diary’s pages were deliberately altered after theft, only claims that published passages were distorted or misrepresented [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. The theft and sale: how the diary entered the public sphere
Prosecutors say two Florida residents conspired to steal Ashley Biden’s diary and other belongings from a Delray Beach residence in 2020 and arranged to sell the materials, with court filings and reporting indicating Project Veritas paid roughly $40,000 for the property, which then circulated to right‑leaning outlets ahead of the 2020 election [2] [5] [6].
2. Ownership authenticated — but content authentication remained disputed
Fact‑checkers and news outlets long treated the physical existence and provenance of the diary as “strongly suggested” by reporting and circumstantial evidence; that posture shifted when Ashley Biden’s April 2024 letter to the court — in which she wrote that her “personal journal can be viewed online” — led Snopes and others to update their assessments and accept that the diary did belong to her [3] [5] [4].
3. What was published and where: fragments, outlets and claims of manipulation
Pages or excerpts attributed to the diary were published by right‑leaning sites such as the National File and circulated by Project Veritas operatives and allies; reporting describes that portions of the diary were made public and then used politically, and Ashley Biden has said those private writings were “constantly distorted and manipulated” when presented online [6] [7] [4].
4. Legal outcomes and admissions tie the chain of custody together
Two people pleaded guilty in the scheme to peddle the stolen diary and related items, and one defendant was sentenced with prosecutors asserting the theft was politically motivated; court proceedings and reporting establish a clear chain from theft to sale to publication even as debates over the accuracy of specific published passages continued [1] [2] [8].
5. The core question — were pages “changed”? — and what the reporting actually shows
None of the cited sources present a public forensic report or independent handwriting/ink analysis demonstrating that pages were materially altered after theft; instead the reporting documents that fragments were published and that Ashley Biden says those excerpts were misread and distorted, which is not the same as proof of textual alteration or fabrication after the diary left her possession [4] [3] [5].
6. Competing narratives, agendas and limits of available evidence
Right‑wing outlets emphasized sensational diary passages and treated publication as confirmation, while fact‑checkers initially hesitated and later updated their conclusions when Ashley Biden’s court letter authenticated ownership; defenders of the president’s family point to the criminal convictions and Biden’s statement about online exposure, whereas critics argue publication itself proves the contents — reporting makes clear both political incentives and the absence of public forensic proof of post‑theft changes [6] [3] [4].
7. Bottom line and unanswered forensic questions
The documented timeline and court records confirm the diary was stolen, sold and published, and Ashley Biden’s letter confirms it belonged to her [1] [5]. What remains absent from the cited reporting is a publicly released technical analysis showing whether any pages were altered, added, or redacted after the theft; therefore, claims that the diary was “changed” are not supported by the available public evidence cited here, though credible allegations of distortion in how passages were presented do appear in Ashley Biden’s own statement [4] [3].