Tag: Paul Pelosi

By on

When Paul Pelosi was attacked by a home intruder in October there was some speculation in the Conservative gutter press that he was having a homosexual assignation with the intruder. This speculation was just that — speculation. The police never said sex was involved. Paul Pelosi certainly did not nor did Pelosi’s attacker. But some conservatives never let facts get in the way of malicious speculation. If a Pelosi was involved, there had to be something rotten and, brave souls that they are, they weren’t afraid to speculate how rotten it was.

Amazingly these fevered fanatics, with absolutely no tangible evidence to support them, spun a scandal worth spreading in the press. Pelosi was attacked. He must have deserved it. Pelosi lives in San Francisco a known gay mecca. If San Francisco is in the story, something gay must be afoot. Then Pelosi was in his underwear. Why was Pelosi so scantily clad? Their argument boiled down to a San Francisco man dressed in his underwear was attacked by another man. For them, this screams Gay. Gay. Gay. Based on this slim gruel, they created a lover’s quarrel that ended badly. While wallowing in this sexual scandal they created, they also down played the possibility that the attacker had any political motive even though there was far more evidence to support this version. The attacker is nudist. He is a vegetarian. He lives in the Bay Area. He couldn’t possibly be a right-wing nut.

The conservative press worked on this version of the story. Pelosi was complicit in the attack because he was on the prowl for illicit sex. If Pelosi was made to look guilty of some sin then the attack, while unwarranted, happened because he was looking for sex outside of his marriage. There is, of course, no evidence to support this version. These stewards of morality hinted that maybe if you are looking for sex on the dirty streets of San Francisco, you might deserve what happens to you. The story became Paul Pelosi’s sex life instead of a right-wing nut job attacks Paul Pelosi.

A very crafty move and, in this particular case, it was factually wrong. There is no evidence that any of their story was true. The explanation that the police and Pelosi gave at the time looks to be true. The police recently released the tapes of the attack. The video shows the attacker spewing anti-Pelosi rants. And, if this wasn’t convincing enough, then the attacker proudly goes on Fox News to brag about the attack. From this new evidence, it sounds like the attacker did have political motives for his actions and not personal ones. You would think that would end any further speculation about what happened to Pelosi. And you would be wrong.

Charles Glasser, in his analysis in the conservative blog Instapundit, still maintains nothing refutes the possibility of Pelosi being involved in an affair with his attacker. The attackers diatribe against the Pelosis is ignored while, for some reason, Glasser wants to know more about why Pelosi is in his underwear. It that really that shocking? The attack happened in the early morning. If you broke into my house at 2AM in the morning, you would definitely find me in my underwear. Why does Glasser need more explanation? Why isn’t “I just got out of bed to find out what all the noise was about” enough?

Glasser chooses to believe the speculation while ignoring the facts. He still wants to pursue the sexual encounter story even though there is little evidence to support this story while completely ignoring the plentiful supply of facts that supports that a nut job fueled by right wing hate rhetoric took a hammer to Pelosi’s head. I am not sure why anyone would want to argue about this anymore. Nancy Pelosi is no longer the speaker. This, at best, is a side show. But conservatives can’t quite bring themselves to follow this route. They need to keep the dubious story in play because the truth would raise questions about the violent nature of some individuals on the Republican right wing. This would force them and the press into a different conversation, one they definitely don’t want to have. Better to make Pelosi a closeted gay adulterer than tell the truth.

By on

When last I was talking about Paul Pelosi, Greg Kelly, conspiracy theorist extraordinaire, speculated that Nancy Pelosi had someone attack her husband with a hammer to gain sympathy for the Democrats in the upcoming election. I am happy to say they have moved on. To another conspiracy theory. This conspiracy theory carried a little more heft as it was passed on by one of the richest men on earth — Elon Musk. This theory has Paul Pelosi galavanting at gay bars (he lives in San Francisco for Christ’s sake), and we all know Paul is a bit of a drinker (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), bringing home a hustler (more winks, more nudges) and later is attacked by said hustler.

What to say. First that one of the most powerful men on earth would choose to pass on unsubstantiated speculation speaks poorly of Musk. Given that he is about to take over Twitter with its huge social network, and that there is already criticism about how Musk might handle such power, now would have been an excellent time for him to show some restraint. Instead, he threw himself into spreading speculation without giving it a second thought. At this point, there is no evidence that Paul Pelosi was at a gay bar nor that his attacker was a hustler. What responsible person would pass on this unsubstantiated gossip? Apparently, Elon Musk.

Then, in this situation at least, Paul Pelosi is a victim of a crime. Even if it turns out that Musk’s gossip proves to be true, none of it matters, because someone hit Paul Pelosi in the head with a hammer. Nobody deserves that. Not if the person is gay, not if the person was hiring a hustler. Musk, very slyly, is blaming Pelosi for being attacked. Forget the hammer, why was he in a gay bar with a hustler. Neither of which is known to be true.

Contrary to current thinking, passing on gossip as truth is not some innocent act. Just because you hear information, doesn’t mean you need to pass it on. Now, if Musk was some neighborhood biddy passing along gossip, it would be bad enough, but he is, and he know he is, a very visible person. A lot of people listen to what he has to say. For him, to pass on gossip is unforgivable. He is clearly trying to undermine Nancy and Paul Pelosi. Why?

Right now all we know is that Pelosi was attacked and in the hospital. If people want to say anything, it should be to wish him a quick recovery. If you hate the Pelosi’s so much, and you can’t bring yourself to wish him well, then just keep your mouth shut. You aren’t required to say anything. Musk should try it more often. It would add to his mystery and certainly enhance his reputation more than the things he says.

By on

Greg Kelly, Newsmax Host, speculates that Nancy Pelosi might have had her own husband attacked. Kelly deleted this speculation later but not before it was seen and copied. Yes, he thinks that woman who has been married to a man for close to 60 years would arrange for a man to attack her 82 year old husband in order to win an election campaign. This is the state of American politics.

It is sad that not even for one very brief moment that Kelly could not just keep his mouth shut. And that is the best response when dealing with awkward questions about people you may not like. He doesn’t have to wish her and her husband well as they go through this unhappy event. He could have followed the old adage of if he couldn’t say something nice, he could have just said nothing. That would have been fine.

Instead he decided to behave badly. He raised his eyebrows suspiciously for everyone to see and speculated how this hammer attack is happening so close to the end of a hard fought election, could Nancy Pelosi have initiated this attack in order to gain sympathy for the Democrats. I realize that Kelly’s fallback position is if Nancy Pelosi is involved there must be some conspiracy going on. But his quick draw reaction was so premature, unnecessary and cruel. It just happened, couldn’t he wait a day or two, before connecting the dots which lead to conspiracy. In a few days, the cops will know more, more will be known about the attacker and, then, and only then, can he draw the lines connecting this attack to some Nancy Pelosi conspiracy or another.