It didnt matter that authorities said Paul Pelosi was alone when the suspect broke into the couples San Francisco home. Or that investigators said they didnt believe the two men knew one another.

It didnt even matter that the suspect, David DePape, confessed to investigators that he broke into the Pelosi home to target the speaker.

Misleading claims about the assault spread rapidly anyway, and not just thanks to trolls in obscure internet chatrooms. The claims received a major boost from some prominent Republicans and Elon Musk, now the owner of Twitter, one of the worlds leading online platforms.

On Monday, posts falsely suggesting a personal relationship between Pelosi and the alleged assailant, soared on Twitter, a day after Musk tweeted and deleted a link to an article suggesting one.

Musk hasnt said why he linked to the article, or why he deleted his post, which came in response to a tweet from Hillary Clinton that condemned the attack. Twitter did not immediately respond to questions from The Associated Press on Monday.

Its like he forgot for a second that he was now the owner of the platform, and not just anther user who can say whatever he wants, said Brad Greenspan, a tech entrepreneur and an early investor in MySpace. Now, being the owner, there are a whole new set of responsibilities.

One of several Republicans to amplify the baseless conspiracy theory, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., defended Musk on Monday with a tweet that repeated the misleading claim about Paul Pelosis friend attacking him with a hammer.

Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., joked about the attack with his own tweet, since deleted, that repeated the conspiracy theory.

Donald Trump Jr., meanwhile, ridiculed Paul Pelosi on Twitter with false assertions.

The claim also spread to other platforms, including fringe sites like Gab and Truth Social, where posts mocked the 82-year-old victim.

San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins on Monday begged other political leaders to be mindful of their comments about the case.

We of course do not want distorted facts floating around, certainly not in a manner that is further traumatizing a family that has been traumatized enough, she said.

The posts focusing on Paul Pelosi were just a subset of a recent wave of hateful and conspiracy theory-laden posts that followed Musks purchase of Twitter.

Within just 12 hours of Musks purchase being finalized Friday, references to a specific racist epithet used to demean Black people shot up by 500%, according to an analysis conducted by the National Contagion Research Institute, a Princeton, N.J.-based firm that tracks disinformation.

Extremism experts and disinformation researchers had warned that the change in ownership could upend Twitters efforts to combat misinformation and hate speech, especially with this years midterm elections just days away.

Yosef Getachew, director of the media and democracy program at Common Cause, said theres a significant risk that misinformation spreading so soon before the election could confuse or frighten voters, or lead to more polarization or even acts of violence.

Rather than cave in to conspiracy theorists and propaganda peddlers, we urge Musk to ensure Twitters rules and enforcement practices reflect our values of democracy and public safety, Getachew said.

Authorities in San Francisco held a press conference Monday to discuss the latest on the investigation into the attack. DePape told police that he wanted to take Nancy Pelosi hostage and break her kneecaps, they said.

District Attorney Brooke Jenkins debunked several other aspects of the conspiracy theory as well, saying theres no evidence DePape knew Paul Pelosi, and saying Pelosi was alone at home when DePape broke in.

While belief in conspiracy theories is nothing new to American history, experts who study disinformation say they can become dangerous when they persuade people to consider violence as an alternative to politics, or when they cause people to ignore inconvenient truths.

DePape appears to have authored racist and often rambling online posts in which he questioned the results of the 2020 election, defended former President Donald Trump and echoed QAnon conspiracy theories.

QAnon adherents support the belief that Trump is secretly waging a battle against a sect of blood-drinking Satanists who have controlled world events for eons. The movement has been linked to an increasing number of acts of real-world violence in recent years.

Social media has sped up the proliferation of conspiracy theories, helped believers organize, and enabled groups to weaponize disinformation for their own ends, according to Sacha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, a group that supports new regulations on platforms.

Twitter and other platforms, Haworth said, have created a toxic atmosphere where public officials and their families are at risk (and) now online threats are spilling over into real-world violence.

Sign up for the Fortune Features email list so you dont miss our biggest features, exclusive interviews, and investigations.

Biden in brief remarks criticized major oil companies for making record-setting profits while refusing to help lower prices at the pump for the American people. The president suggested he will look to Congress to levy tax penalties on oil tax companies if they dont begin to invest some of their profits in lowering costs for American consumers. The president issued the warning just days before the Nov. 8 midterm elections.

My team will work with Congress to look at these these options that are available to us and others, Biden said. Its time for these companies to stop war profiteering, meet their responsibilities in this country and give the American people a break and still do very well.

Biden took aim at one company, ExxonMobil, that reported $19.7 billion earnings in the third quarter alone. He lashed at the Irving, Texas-headquarter company for using record profits to provide shareholders with hefty dividends and stock buybacks but failing to invest in production improvements that would benefit consumers at the pump. Another oil company, Chevron, had $11.23 billion in profits in the third quarter, almost reaching the record profits it attained in the prior quarter.

Over the last two quarters, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, and TotalEnergy earned over $100 billion in profitsmore than they earned all of last year, and more than two-and-a-half times what they earned in the same quarters of 2021.

Oil companies. record profits today are not because of doing something new or innovative, Biden said. Their profits are a windfall of war, a windfall for the brutal conflict thats ravaging Ukraine and hurting tens of millions of people around the globe.

High prices at the pump have exacerbated inflation and have taken a toll on Biden and Democrats standing among voters.

Congress would have to approve any additional taxes on the energy producers which would be a tall order in the current Congress where Democrats have narrow control of the House and Senate, and even less likely should Republicans retake one or both chambers on Nov. 8.

Americans have struggled with painfully high gasoline prices in recent months, paying more than $4.80 on average for a gallon of regular at the beginning of July, according to AAA. Theyve since fallen to $3.76 on average nationally, but the White House says they should be lower, given declines in global oil prices over the same period.

Cant believe I have to say this but giving profits to shareholders is not the same as bringing prices down for American families, Biden tweeted on Friday.

Biden has been critical of energy companies profits since at least June, when he complained publicly that Exxon made more money than God this year.

Bidens threat of windfall taxes on energy companies follows calls by progressive Democrats, including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, for such a proposal.

And last week, California Gov. Gavin Newsom called on Congress to tax the profits of oil companies. Crude oil prices are down but oil and gas companies have jacked up prices at the pump in California. This doesnt add up, Newsom said on Friday. Were not going to stand by while greedy oil companies fleece Californians. Instead, Im calling for a windfall tax to ensure excess oil profits go back to help millions of Californians who are getting ripped off.

The Democratic-controlled House passed a bill in May authorizing the Federal Trade Commission to punish companies that engage in price gouging and adding a new unit at the FTC to monitor fuel markets. The bill has stalled in the Senate. A related measure by Senate Commerce Committee Chair Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., has not come to the Senate floor for a vote.

This is exactly the type of leadership weve been waiting for from President Biden, said Jamie Henn, spokesperson for the group Stop the Oil Profiteering. Big Oil has made nearly $300 billion in excess profits this year by gouging us at the pump. A windfall profits tax can provide immediate relief by redirecting that money into the pockets of hardworking Americans.

Industry groups have condemned the prospect of a windfall tax, with American Exploration & Production Council CEO Anne Bradbury saying it would likely backfire by further driving up energy costs for American families and businesses.

Rather than taking credit for price declines and shifting blame for price increases, the Biden administration should get serious about addressing the supply and demand imbalance that has caused higher gas prices and created long-term energy challenges, said Mike Sommers, president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute. Today, the President is proposing to raise taxes on the U.S. natural gas and oil industry that is competing globally to produce the fuels Americans need every single day. Oil companies do not set pricesglobal commodities markets do.

Sign up for the Fortune Features email list so you dont miss our biggest features, exclusive interviews, and investigations.

Among them was Janice Turner, one of a steady stream of people some wearing costumes buying Powerball tickets at an outdoor kiosk in midtown Manhattan.

Im hoping to be the next billionaire, Turner said. I think its going to be lucky Halloween.

In the same line was Scott Henyan, who was already making plans for a jackpot win.

I would definitely retire, finish my house, probably buy another house, maybe buy a couple of nice cars, take a nice vacation, he said. And then probably set all my friends and family up for the rest of their lives and travel the world, you know, do whatever I wanted.

In Houston, 60-year-old Candy Dumas, a real estate home stager, said she came to a Super K Food Store because of the high payout.

If I am the lucky winner tonight, the first thing Im going to do is give some to my church, for sure, Dumas said. The second thing would be to buy a home for my children. Thats what I want to do to help my family for sure.

Guru Redey, a clerk at the store, said people come to the store from miles away because it has a history of selling large jackpot winners and people like to dream of owning expensive things they cant afford.

Dozens of people, including Orelia Pearson, lined up Monday to buy tickets at the Bluebird Liquor Store in Hawthorne, California, which also has a reputation as being a lucky store.

Its a good spot to come, Pearson said. And when its a good spot to come, youre supposed to come and play and have your mind on it and be positive and things will happen for you.

And Sally Tanner said she would give much of her winnings away after buying herself a house and paying off her sons college costs.

Were going through a recession right now, Tanner said. The economy sucks, so I would be a giver. Im a giver, but I will keep some for us. I guess my cup will be full, but when it overflows, Ill bless others.

The jackpot soared after no one matched all six numbers in Saturday nights drawing. Its the fifth-largest lottery jackpot in U.S. history. The biggest prize was a $1.586 billion Powerball jackpot won by three ticketholders in 2016.

No one has hit all six numbers since Aug. 3, a testament to how slim the odds are of winning the jackpot: 1 in 292.2 million.

Mondays huge jackpot comes less than two years after another lottery reached the $1 billion mark. A ticket matched all six numbers drawn Jan. 22, 2021, in the Mega Millions lottery to win the $1.05 billion dollar jackpot.

Massive lottery jackpots have become more common in recent years as lottery officials have adjusted game rules and ticket prices to pump up the top prizes. The most recent tweak came in August, when Powerball officials added an additional drawing day going from two drawings a week to three in an effort to build larger prizes and boost sales.

Although the odds of winning are meager, the chances of someone or even multiple players coming up with the winning numbers is growing. Thats because as the jackpot grows, more people pony up to play.

The $1 billion jackpot prize is for winners who opt to take the full amount piecemeal over 29 annual payments. Nearly all winners opt for a lower cash payment, which for Mondays drawing would be an estimated $497.3 million.

Once a winning ticket matches the drawing, the Powerball jackpot starts over again at $20 million and continues to grow each drawing until it is won.

Powerball is played in 45 states, as well as Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Sign up for the Fortune Features email list so you dont miss our biggest features, exclusive interviews, and investigations.

Hearing almost five hours of arguments in Washington on Monday, the justices showed deep divides largely, if not completely, along ideological lines as they heard challenges to affirmative action programs at the University of North Carolina and Harvard College. 

Several of the conservatives suggested they saw affirmative action, which the court first upheld in 1978, as having run its course. They said the Supreme Court never envisioned race-conscious admissions would last forever, and they repeatedly pressed defenders to lay out an end point for the programs.

What are you saying when youre up here in 2040? Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked North Carolina Solicitor General Ryan Park. Are you still defending it, like this is just indefinite, its going to keep going on?

Affirmative action now is common at selective universities, though nine states including California and Florida ban race-conscious admissions at public institutions. A ruling outlawing the practice could mean fewer Black and Hispanic students at many of the top universities a point the courts outnumbered liberals tried to drive home as they focused on the impact across society.

In your view, it really wouldnt matter if there was a precipitous decline in minority admissions African American, Hispanic, one or the other, Justice Elena Kagan said. She described universities as the pipelines to leadership in our society.

But the courts conservatives suggested they were more interested in finding an end date for what some of them cast as racial discrimination in violation of the Constitutions equal protection clause.

Oboe Players

Chief Justice John Roberts bristled when Harvards lawyer, Seth Waxman, likened the consideration of race to a preference given to an oboe player in a year when the college orchestra was in need of another musician.

We did not fight a civil war about oboe players, Roberts said. We did fight a civil war to eliminate racial discrimination, and thats why its a matter of considerable concern.

The court is likely to rule by June in the cases, potentially making the current university admissions cycle the last one with affirmative action.

Racial-preference opponents are seeking to overturn the courts 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision, which reaffirmed that universities can consider race in admissions to bolster campus diversity.  

Justice Clarence Thomas made clear he viewed diversity as too amorphous a concept to warrant letting schools make racial distinctions.

Ive heard the word diversity quite a few times, and I dont have a clue what it means, Thomas said. It seems to mean everything for everyone.

When Park argued that diversity had educational benefits, Thomas said he didnt put much stock in that because Ive heard similar arguments in favor of segregation, too.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the courts newest member and its first Black woman, questioned the idea that universities were giving sweeping racial preferences. She said North Carolina considered race only when individual students say in their applications that its is an important part of who they are.

This is not a situation in which the university is asking or telling every applicant, Give us your race, so that we can classify people, so that we can give certain people preferences, Jackson said. The only reason why the university knows the race of any of these applicants is because they are voluntarily providing that.

Jackson is taking part only in the North Carolina case, having recused herself from the Harvard fight after a six-year term on that universitys Board of Overseers.

Racial-preference opponents are trying to take advantage of a court that has become more conservative since the 2003 Grutter decision. The universities are fighting lawsuits by Students for Fair Admissions, an anti-preferences organization that says its members include unsuccessful applicants to both schools. The group is run by former stockbroker Edward Blum.

End Point

Even in the 2003 case, the court suggested that affirmative actions days were numbered. Writing the majority opinion Justice Sandra Day OConnor said, We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary. 

The conservative wing repeatedly pointed to that passage Monday. Grutter doesnt say, This is great, we embrace this, Barrett said. Grutter says, This is dangerous, and it has to have an endpoint.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh told another lawyer backing the North Carolina policy that you would extend it far beyond 25 years, indefinitely.

Patrick Strawbridge, a lawyer representing Students for Fair Admissions, said abolishing race-conscious admissions wouldnt preclude universities from considering a students experience overcoming racism. And he said universities could still making diversity a goal as long if used race-neutral means to pursuit it.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, another conservative, suggested universities might be able improve diversity by eliminating preferences given to athletes and the children of alumni and big-money donors.

Is there compelling interest in a squash team composed of really good players or a new art museum? he asked Park, the North Carolina lawyer.

But liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who has described herself as an affirmative action beneficiary, said the trial judge in the North Carolina case found that race-neutral methods proposed by the challengers would mean a reduction in diversity.

I looked at all of your simulations, every one of them, Sotomayor said. So did the district court. And in every one of them, white representation stayed the same or went up. And some minority groups increased, but others did not. Blacks decreased in every one of your simulations.

As a private institution, Harvard isnt bound by the equal protection clause, which applies only to government actors. The suit against Harvard involves the Civil Rights Acts Title VI, which covers recipients of federal funds and bars discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin.

The North Carolina lawsuit invokes Title VI as well as the Constitutions equal protection clause. The Supreme Court in 1978 said the two provisions imposed similar legal requirements on universities.