The most visceral part of Trump’s latest political tactic was on display during last night’s presidential debate: a baseless claim that immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, are eating people’s pets. “In Springfield, they are eating dogs, the people that came in, they’re eating the cats, and they are eating the pets of the people that live there,” Trump said.
David Muir, co-moderator of the debate, quickly fact checked Trump, saying, “ABC News did reach out to the city manager there. He told us there have been no credible reports of specific claims of pets being harmed, injured or abused by individuals within the immigrant community.”
But Trump begged to differ.
The false statement has been shared all week by Trump’s running mate J.D. Vance and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) in what elected officials and the American public have described as anti-immigrant bigotry. “The Republican attacks on the Haitian community are nothing new,” New York State Senator Jessica Ramos said about the political tactic. “They rely on division & bigotry.” Several other elected leaders and advocacy groups have condemned the statement as harmful anti-Haitian rhetoric and racist comments.
Much of everything else former President Trump said about immigration during Tuesday night’s debate was an attempt to equate immigrants to criminals, repeating claims that crime is high, and that immigrants are the cause — a statement that has been fact checked to be wrong over and again.
Muir fact checked Trump during the debate, saying, “Trump, as you know, the FBI says, overall, violent crime is actually coming down in this country.” To which Trump said, “It was a fraud,” referring to the FBI’s data.
Also Read: Kamala Harris DNC Speech Confronts Trump Scare Tactics About Immigration
Still, when asked how he would deport 11 million undocumented immigrants in his mass deportation plan — about 5 million of whom are children, a vast majority being U.S. citizens at risk of being separated from a parent who is undocumented — Trump failed to respond with a concrete plan but went on a rant about the fallacy that is “millions of criminals,” in his words, that have poured into the country.
Trump again called Vice President Harris “the Border Czar,” an assignment and role that Harris never had. However, Trump and his Republican allies have continued to seize upon a diplomatic assignment Harris had under the Biden administration to tackle the root causes of migration in Central America as proof of her poor leadership.
In one breath, Trump said two contradictory and inaccurate statements about how to control the border. “I’d like to see her go down to Washington, D.C. during this debate…and sign a bill to close up the border. They have a right to do it. They don’t need bills.”
While Trump claims that the president does “not need bills” to execute legislative action on the border, in reality such an act is limited by a legal process that is dependent on congressional votes. And, a bipartisan border security bill has been languishing in Congress. But just as the presidential campaign trail gained momentum, Trump pressured GOP lawmakers to kill the deal. As a result, Senate Republicans blocked it.
“Trump told his MAGA allies to kill it in its tracks so he could exploit the issue on the campaign trail,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), told reporters after the vote.
Also Read: How Republicans Centered False Immigration Narratives Throughout RNC in Milwaukee
During the debate, Vice President Kamala Harris listed all that the border security bill would have done, including assigning more border agents to the US-Mexico border. “But you know what happened to that bill? Donald Trump got on the phone, called up some folks in Congress and said, ‘Kill the bill,’ ” Harris said.
Harris was on offense the whole night of the debate, in what commentators, even Republicans, have concluded was a remarkable performance. In the debate, she baited Trump and succeeded, prebunked his lies, and explained his methods.
“I’ll tell you something, he’s going to talk about immigration a lot tonight, even when it’s not the subject that is being raised,” Harris said during the debate. She used Tuesday night as an opportunity to describe in more detail what policies she’d pursue as president.
The bipartisan border security bill has its own flaws, and immigration experts say while it does contain solutions, it is not a panacea for all of America’s immigration problems.
For more analysis, join us for a quick debrief of the presidential debate with immigration experts over Zoom at 1:30 pm today.
