Latest GOP accusation that turns out to be a confession: Animal cruelty

In the past few weeks, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and his running mate, JD Vance, have capitalized on a disturbing and false narrative: that legal immigrants in America, specifically Haitian immigrants in Ohio, are stealing and eating people’s pets. This baseless claim, aimed at stoking fear and racial division, is part of a troubling pattern of dehumanization and political exploitation.

However, the narrative comes on the heels of horrifying stories about Republican leaders’ personal behavior toward animals — stories that speak volumes about their lack of empathy and moral grounding, and call into question who truly poses a threat to American’s furry and feathered family.

According to a report by The Guardian, Kevin Roberts, president of the right-wing Heritage Foundation and one of the architects behind the anti-immigrant and anti-democracy manifesto Project 2025, allegedly confessed to killing a neighbor’s dog with a shovel. Multiple former colleagues at New Mexico State University recall Roberts sharing this story, where he claimed to have killed the dog out of frustration over its incessant barking. Despite his later denial to The Guardian, the consistency of these accounts from different sources paints a disturbing picture. Indeed, witnesses said he was actually bragging about killing his neighbor’s pet.

This revelation comes just months after South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, at the time a leading candidate to be Trump’s vice presidential running mate, also admitted to savage violence toward animals. In her recent book, Noem recounted shooting her own dog, Cricket, and then killing a goat in a rage, actions she seemed to justify as decisive leadership. These stories reflect a disturbing trend of cruelty cloaked in political posturing.

It’s hard to escape the notion that parts of the American right think that extreme acts of cruelty toward the defenseless are somehow validating. Little wonder they embrace the policies they do.

Yet, while GOP leaders like Roberts and Noem have been linked to actual animal cruelty, the Trump-Vance campaign has chosen to focus on immigrants as a supposed threat to America’s pets.

It’s crucial to note that the Haitian immigrants targeted by Trump and Vance have every legal right to be in the U.S. These are individuals who followed the law, sought refuge and resettled in Ohio as part of the country’s legal immigration process. Yet, instead of acknowledging their contributions to the community, Trump and Vance chose to vilify them in a grotesque and wholly fabricated manner.

Moreover, Trump and Vance knew that the stories of Haitians eating pets were lies from the very beginning.

On the morning of Sept. 9, a full day before the presidential debate, a staffer from Vance’s campaign team called Springfield, Ohio, City Manager Bryan Heck and asked if there was any truth to bizarre rumors about Haitian immigrants eating pets in the city.

“I told him no,” Heck said. “There was no verifiable evidence or reports to show this was true. I told them these claims were baseless.”

That didn’t stop Vance from posting the vile rumor to his 1.9 million followers on X or stop Trump from repeating it the next day for 67 million Americans watching the presidential debate.

Since then, the rumor has spread like wildfire, leading thousands of MAGA supporters to reveal their hatred and xenophobia as they phone in death threats and bomb threats against schoolchildren whose only crime is having dark skin and thus being pawns in savage political exploitation. Thankfully, we note that many residents of Springfield and Ohio have rallied to the Haitians’ defense, including Springfield’s Republican mayor, Ohio’s Republican governor and Springfield employers who hired Haitians. They are begging MAGA to stop these lies.

This strategy of scapegoating immigrants is neither new nor unique to Trump’s campaign. In the 1930s in Germany, Nazis enacted animal welfare laws after floating lies that Jews were cruel to animals. It also taps into an old strain of American racism, where non-white communities are depicted as a menace. But it’s not immigrants who are killing animals or threatening schoolchildren — it’s the leaders of the political movement spreading these dangerous lies.

The willingness of prominent Republicans to invoke such horrifying imagery about immigrants, coupled with their own violent behavior toward pets, speaks volumes about the state of the party. These are not mere campaign tactics but deliberate choices to sow division, fear and hatred — all in the name of political gain.

By repeating lies about immigrants eating pets, Trump and Vance have legitimized a narrative that appeals to the worst instincts in American society, fueling nativism and racism.

But what is most shocking is that, even when confronted with the truth, they refuse to back down. Even after being told directly by Springfield’s city officials that no pets had been harmed by Haitian immigrants, the campaign continued to push the story. This reflects not only a disregard for facts but a troubling willingness to incite violence against vulnerable communities.

As Americans, we should be asking ourselves: Who poses the real threat here? Is it the legal immigrants who have followed every rule to make a better life for themselves in this country, or the political leaders who promote lies and condone cruelty? When not bashing in the skull of a neighbor’s pet dog with a shovel, they turn the rhetorical shovel to bash in the skulls of immigrants and rally white supremacists to their cause.

Reflect on this: Neither Trump nor Vance called forcefully for the violent threats in Springfield to stop. There can be only one reason for this failure: They wanted to victimize the Haitians.

It is time for voters to hold accountable those who spread disinformation and fear. Leaders who play fast and loose with the truth, especially when it leads to violence, have no place in shaping the future of this country. And while Trump, Vance and their supporters may claim to care about pets, their actions — and the company they keep — suggest otherwise.