Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Behind the “Lie of the Year,” some bitter truths

Opinion

Behind the “Lie of the Year,” some bitter truths

Diners watch as Republican presidential candidate, former U.S. President Donald Trump, and Democratic presidential candidate, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris, debate for the first time during the presidential election campaign on September 10, 2024 at the Bar Tabac in New York City.

(Photo by Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images)

As it has been doing yearly since 2009, the fact-checking organization PolitiFact has chosen the Lie of the Year (2024). There was an abundance of nominees.

And, it turns out, they chose the same whopper I identified as a top contender months ago: President-elect Donald Trump’s unfounded claim that Haitian migrants were eating the household pets of Springfield, Ohio.


“In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs,” said the former and now future Republican president during his Sept. 10 debate with his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris.

“The people that came in,” he continued to a TV audience of an estimated 67 million viewers. “They’re eating the cats. They’re eating, they’re eating the pets of the people that live there. And this is what’s happening in our country. And it’s a shame.”

Oh, really? An astonished-looking Harris gave an incredulous laugh, but the line was not a new one for Trump and his MAGA movement supporters, including his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, whom Politifact co-credited for the Lie of the Year.

Yet, before I happily rip into that bone-headed attempt to slander innocent refugees living and working peacefully in Springfield, according to local officials and Ohio’s Republican Gov. Mike DeWine, who have welcomed their labor to the economically troubled town near where I grew up, allow me to note a leading alternative nominee in the eyes of some prominent conservative commentators: Democratic President Joe Biden.

“It’s hard to imagine a more perfect encapsulation of the total rot of American media than this,” huffed Dylan Housman, editor-in-chief of the conservative Daily Caller, in a column decrying Politifact’s choice for the dubious award.

Trump’s and Vance’s lie, Housman offered, “is the equivalent of a speck of dirt sitting at the base of a mountain that is one of the biggest scandals in American political history: the lie that Joe Biden was acting as president in 2024 and was mentally capable of serving another four years.”

Biden’s whopper deserves more attention, wrote Housman, “because it tells us the media has learned nothing. Through all the navel-gazing, post-mortems and autopsies, the corporate media has learned nothing about why Donald Trump is president and nobody trusts them.”

And on and on come the protests from the right. As I often point out when political arguments break out at my own home, everyone is entitled to have their own wrong opinion.

Frankly, I’m not delighted by Biden’s broken promise to avoid pardoning his troubled son Hunter, either. Yet I can’t say I would not have done the same for my own son, especially if it looked — as it appears in Hunter Biden’s case — that he was mainly in trouble because of me.

But let’s get back to Housman’s conceit about "why Donald Trump is president." It has much to do with the immigration issue, which in the spin of the Trump campaign was an edifice built on some truths but also a great deal of half-truths and outright lies.

Accusing Haitian immigrants in Springfield of eating pets had become a Republican talking point before Trump mentioned it in the debate. What apparently started as an unsubstantiated post in a local Facebook group spread through far-right and neo-Nazi social media before being laundered by more mainstream influencers and eventually getting picked up by Vance and then Trump.

For Vance and Trump, the Haitians were a convenient, symbolism-laden group to raise fear and suspicions about immigration and border security reform.

It didn’t matter that the 12,000 to 15,000 Haitians of Springfield were almost all there legally, having been granted Temporary Protected Status, and that many came to the town after being recruited to fill positions the local workforce couldn’t. And of course it didn’t matter that those who spread the stories of pet eating hadn’t made the least attempt to verify the facts.

In fact, after Trump’s ridiculous debate performance against Harris, CNN’s Dana Bash confronted Vance about the patent falsity of the story. His response was an astonishing admission: "If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do…."

So it was a lie, but it was OK because Vance and Trump needed anti-immigrant hysteria front-and-center in election coverage.

Soon after the debate, Springfield was experiencing multiple bomb threats, school closures and growing fear of the sort anyone would feel when their community suddenly is being targeted and terrorized by strangers, spurred by militant fanatics and paranoid conspiracy theorists.

I wish the Haitians well. As a former resident of that part of Ohio whose parents migrated there from Alabama, I was delighted to hear that the migrants apparently had fit peacefully and productively into the area until politics raised its ugly head.

We need to get back to giving newcomers a more proper welcome, but I guess we’ve got to get past another election first.

Behind the “Lie of the Year,” some bitter truths was first published by The Tribune Content Agency, and was republished with permission.

Clarence Page is an American journalist, syndicated columnist, and senior member of the Chicago Tribune editorial board.

©2024 Tribune Content Agency. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less