Assailant breaks into Nancy Pelosi’s home, attacks husband Paul Pelosi
The San Francisco District Attorney called for political rhetoric to be toned down as she announced state charges against David DePape for the alleged hammer attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband.
Brooke Jenkins said that her office will charge the suspect with attempted murder, residential burglary, assault with a deadly weapon, elder abuse, false imprisonment of an elder, and threats to a public official and their family.
“Violence has no place in the city and we will work vigorously to hold the defendant accountable,” she told a Monday press conference. As leaders and citizens, it is incumbent upon us all to watch the words that we say and to turn down the volume of our political rhetoric. We should be able to all engage in passionate political discourse but still remain respectful of each other. Violence has no place in San Francisco or politics,” she said.
It came hours after it was announced that the suspect is facing two federal charges for threatening violence against a US official’s spouse.
The Department of Justice filing on Monday afternoon detailed how the 42-year-old allegedly wanted to “kneecap” the House Speaker to “show other Members of Congress there were consequences to actions.”
The Associated Press reported the charge on Monday afternoon, three days after the 42-year-old was accused of breaking and entering into the couple’s Pacific Heights home and assaulting the 82-year-old.
Earlier, Donald Trump Jr was blasted online for sharing “dangerous” and “sick” memes that appeared to make light of the attack, while Fox News seemed to defend Twitter‘s new boss Elon Musk for sharing a baseless conspiracy theory about the attack.
Musk wrote in a tweet, that he later deleted, “there is a tiny possibility there might be more to this story than meets the eye”.
He made the post while sharing an article that claimed, without evidence, that the House speaker’s husband met his attacker at a gay bar.
Fox & Friends hosts came to the Tesla founder’s defence, claiming the merits of his post was about “free speech” while ignoring the contents of his message were spreading misinformation.
