Family Devastatingly Begs Trump to Leave Son Out of Migrant Conspiracy

The parents of a young boy who was killed in a bus accident Springfield, Ohio, were forced to beg Republican lawmakers to stop using their son’s death as a political tool against Haitian immigrants.

Last month, Aiden Clark was killed after a minivan went left of center, causing his school bus to crash into it and go off the road, flipping over. The minivan was driven by Hermanio Joseph, a Haitian immigrant in the country under temporary protected legal status. Joseph was sentenced to nine to 13.5 years in prison for the crash on charges of first-degree felony involuntary manslaughter and fourth-degree felony vehicular homicide.

In the last week, this incident has become part of an outcry from right-wing extremists elevating racist rumors that Haitian immigrants were wreaking havoc in Springfield and had started eating people’s pets to boot.

Aiden’s parents appeared at a Springfield City Commission meeting on Tuesday, where Aiden’s father, Nathan Clark, made a startling but powerful plea for lawmakers to stop speaking about their son.

“I wish that my son, Aiden Clark, was killed by a 60-year-old white man,” Clark said. “I bet you never thought anyone would say something so blunt, but if that guy killed my 11-year-old son, the incessant group of hate-spewing people would leave us alone.

“The last thing that we need is to have the worst day of our lives violently and constantly shoved in our faces, but even that’s not good enough for them. They take it one step further. They make it seem that our wonderful Aiden appreciates your hate, that we should follow their hate,” Clark said, according to the Springfield News-Sun.

Clark condemned statements from U.S Senate candidate Bernie Moreno and Texas Representative Chip Roy, as well as Ohio Senator J.D. Vance and former President Donald Trump. “They have spoken my son’s name and used his death for political gain,” said the grieving father.

“This needs to stop now. They can vomit all the hate they want about illegal immigrants, the border crisis, and even untrue claims about fluffy pets being ravaged and eaten by community members,” Clark said. “However, they are not allowed, nor have they ever been allowed, to mention Aiden Clark from Springfield, Ohio. I will listen to them one more time to hear their apologies.”

“To clear the air, my son Aiden Clark was not murdered. He was accidentally killed by an immigrant from Haiti,” Clark said, countering a claim from Vance’s extremist social media rant on Tuesday, where he’d written that “a child was murdered by a Haitian migrant who had no right to be here.”

“Did you know that one of the worst feelings in the world is to not be able to protect your child?” Clark continued. “Even worse, we can’t even protect his memory when he’s gone.”

Tuesday night’s first presidential matchup between Vice President Kamala Harris and Donald Trump was a wake-up call for Americans—including some of Trump’s closest allies.

On Wednesday, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham had just one word to describe the MAGA leader’s performance: “disaster,” according to The Bulwark Podcast’s Tim Miller.

Speaking with reporters in the spin room following the debate, the conservative legislator lamented Trump’s lackluster answers, calling it a “missed opportunity” where Trump “had a chance to lay it all out.”

“[Harris] said, ‘We inherited a mess,’” Graham said. “I was yelling and screaming, ‘No you didn’t—you inherited low gas prices, a secure border, a vaccine for Covid, you inherited the biggest Mideast change of my lifetime, the Abraham accords, and now everything is to shit.’”

But Trump’s response wasn’t satisfactory, leaving Graham imagining the answer that he wished had entered Trump’s mind.

“What I was hoping for was: ‘When I left we had the most secure border in 40 years, mortgage rates were below 3 percent, gas was $1.87, the Abraham accords, energy independent, you screwed it all up,’” Graham said. He added that he had spoken with Trump to suggest that in future debates against Harris, he should “effectively prosecute what you had and where we’re at” with regard to the state of the country before and after Trump’s administration.

Other notable conservatives were feeling equally cynical about Trump’s performance. Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie told ABC News that whoever had “prepared Donald Trump should be fired,” adding that the former president was “not good tonight at all.” Fox News chief political analyst Brit Hume said that there was “no mistake” that Trump “had a bad night.”

“We just heard so many of the old grievances that we all know aren’t winners politically,” Hume said.

J.D. Vance is doomed to spend the next few months, and maybe the next few years, being a professional scapegoat for Donald Trump. 

During Tuesday night’s debate, when Trump was asked about how he would vote on a national abortion ban, he went out of his way to blame his vice presidential pick.

“Your running mate, J.D. Vance, has said that you would veto [an abortion ban] if it did come to your desk,” said ABC News anchor Linsey Davis, referring to Vance’s statement last month that Trump “explicitly” told him that he would veto a federal abortion ban.

“Well I didn’t discuss it with J.D., in all fairness. And I don’t mind if he has a certain view, but I don’t think he was speaking for me,” Trump said on the debate stage, before stumbling through the rest of his words. “We don’t have to discuss it.” 

When ABC News followed up with Vance after the debate, he was asked to explain  Trump’s answer.

“Well, I think the president’s been very clear that he doesn’t want a national abortion ban,” said Vance “I think in some ways he finds the question a little bit ridiculous because why are we asking him about legislation that’s never going to actually happen and why would he veto it or not veto it when he says very explicitly he doesn’t support a national abortion ban and he wants these policies to be made by the states?”

But Vance’s answer didn’t explain why Trump would throw him under the bus. When asked to further clarify the mix-up, Vance replied both that he “hadn’t spoken to him about it” and that “Donald Trump thinks the question is absurd because he doesn’t support a national abortion ban.” He went on to blame “the media” for targeting Trump on abortion and “distracting” Americans, before shifting attention to attacks on Kamala Harris.

Clearly, Vance is more than happy to kiss the ring.

Donald Trump warned Wednesday that Taylor Swift might “pay a price” for endorsing Kamala Harris.

Swift, a self-proclaimed “Childless Cat Lady,” posted on Instagram shortly after Tuesday night’s presidential debate ended, announcing that she would be voting for Harris in November and urging her followers to do their own research and register to vote.

Swift wrote that her endorsement was in part a response to A.I.-generated images that falsely purported that the superstar supported Trump. The former president was so desperate to get Swift’s endorsement that he happily reposted the fake images last month.

During a call in to Fox & Friends Wednesday morning, Trump was asked to respond to the real Swift’s sudden but inevitable betrayal.

“Out of nowhere, after the debate last night, Taylor Swift endorsed Kamala Harris,” said Steve Doocy. “What do you think?”

“Well, I actually like uh, Mrs. uh … I actually like Mrs. Mahomes much better, if you want to know the truth. She’s a big Trump fan,” Trump said, speaking about Brittany Mahomes, who is married to Patrick Mahomes, the teammate of Swift’s boyfriend, Travis Kelce. “I was not a Taylor Swift fan, and it was just a question of time.”

Trump then claimed Swift “couldn’t, you couldn’t possibly endorse [Joe] Biden. You look at Biden, you couldn’t possibly endorse him. But she’s a very liberal person. She seems to always endorse a Democrat, and she’ll probably pay a price for it at the, uh, in the marketplace.

“But no, I like Brittany. I think Brittany’s great. Brittany got a lot of news last week. She’s a big—she’s a big MAGA fan. That’s the one I like, much better than Taylor Swift,” Trump continued, saying Mahomes was “the wife of the great quarterback, and he is a great quarterback.”

Last week, Brittany Mahomes liked and then unliked an Instagram post from the former president, outlining his 2024 platform and promising to “Keep men OUT of women’s sports,” “Carry out the largest deportation operation in American history,” and “Seal the border, and stop the migrant invasion.” This minute social media behavior seemed to indicate her support for the Republican nominee, and many speculated that it might cause a rift between the notably liberal Swift and Mahomes. It didn’t.

Whether Swift’s endorsement will make a dent in her enormous net worth of $1.1 billion is yet to be seen—but that would be totally surprising because it was entirely expected, given her history of Democratic endorsements and criticism of Trump.

Trump isn’t the only conservative losing it over Swift’s endorsement. Fox News’s Mark Levin, one of the central figures of Trump’s media bubble, took to X to call Swift an “imbecile” for endorsing Harris.

“Taylor Swift just endorsed for president the most antisemitic, pro-Islamist, pro-criminal, anti-cop, anti-middle class & working people, open borders, anti-women’s sports, anti-military, inflation-causing, job-destroying, pathological liar and extremist Marxist politician ever to run for president,” Levin wrote.

In by far the creepiest reaction to Swift’s endorsement, technocrat billionaire and right-wing extremist Elon Musk offered to impregnate her. It seems the pervert must have forgotten that she has a six-foot-five, 250 pound boyfriend.

Donald Trump’s poor debate performance is now hitting his wallet—his media company’s stock plummeted in Wednesday morning trading.

Shares of Trump Media & Technology stock opened 15 percent lower the morning after Tuesday night’s debate on ABC, very close to an all-time low for the company since its initial public offering in March. It’s not a good time, either: In eight days, Trump and the company’s other large shareholders will be allowed to sell their stock.

Trump owns about 57 percent of Trump Media’s stock, amounting to about $2 billion at market close on Tuesday. Wednesday’s early trading caused the value of Trump’s stock to drop $200 million. It’s a sign that investors don’t think he performed well during Tuesday’s debate, as the stock’s performance often shows how people are feeling about the former president.

It’s been a bad couple of months for Trump Media. While its value spiked during the Republican National Convention in July, the stock has declined in the weeks since, particularly after Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential election. When Trump broke a long hiatus to finally post again on X (formerly Twitter) last month, the stock nosedived, as it looked like bad news for Truth Social, Trump Media’s only product.

Trump is in a lot of debt, whether it’s unpaid bills, his legal fees, or the financial judgment against him due to his fraud trial. In fact, the state of New York may very well seize his assets. He’s resorted to half-baked moneymaking schemes like selling NFT trading cards, his own branded Bibles, and assassination-themed sneakers. Will he sell off his stock as soon as he gets the chance? If the other major shareholders in the company do so before he can, the value of his company will plummet even further, and he could be left holding a company that’s worth less than his grandiose promises.

Donald Trump and J.D. Vance have decided to go all in on the outlandish conspiracy theory about Haitian immigrants eating pets in Springfield, Ohio. Did you hear that sound? That was the American public discourse hitting rock bottom, and shattering into one million pieces.

During the presidential debate Tuesday night, Trump elevated a blatantly racist and thoroughly unsubstantiated rumor that individuals in a community of 15,000 Haitian immigrants had begun eating house pets.

“In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs, the people that came in! They’re eating the cats! They’re eating … they’re eating the pets of the people who live there,” Trump claimed while Kamala Harris laughed at him. “And this is what’s happening in our country, and it’s a shame.”

When ABC News moderator David Muir fact-checked him with a statement from Springfield’s City Manager Ryan Heck, who’d said they’d received “no credible reports” of any such activity, Trump fired back that it had to be true because he’d “seen it on television!”

Well, there you go.

Apparently, even Trump knew that wasn’t going to fly in terms of proof, so after the debate, he took to Truth Social in the early hours of the morning to post his own so-called evidence.

Trump posted what appeared to be a call report by the Clark County Communications Center, made on August 26, in which a caller alleged that they had seen a group of people walking down the street carrying geese. The caller “said he could tell they were Haitian because he was within earshot of them to hear them speaking Creole,” according to the report.

Trump also reposted audio of the call, which was obtained by The Federalist, a right-wing opinion blog. In the New York Post-ian world into which Trump has dragged us, it seems a police call is presented as tantamount to a conviction—and a wild goose is tantamount to a house pet.

Trump also posted the video that spurred the right-wing hysterics—of a woman from Canton, Ohio, who allegedly ate a cat. Not only is there no indication that the woman is a Haitian immigrant, but she is a U.S. citizen.

Meanwhile, J.D. Vance pushed back at a question from NBC’s Yamiche Alcindor that implied that he had helped spread the insidious right-wing rumor, which could possibly endanger Haitian immigrants. Earlier that day, he’d posted a rant about how it didn’t really matter if the rumors about pet-eating were actually true.

“No one spread false claims,” Vance said, as he reared up to spread more false claims.

“What they’ve said is that a small migrant community” has “caused a lot of problems,” Vance explained.

“It’s led to higher rates of communicable diseases, that’s a verifiable fact.” It is verifiable—but certainly not verified. In fact, on Tuesday, Ohio’s Department of Health director Bruce Vanderhoff said that Springfield has “not seen a measurable, discernible increase in vaccine preventable illness.”

“It’s led to animals disappearing,” Vance continued, citing reports from “many” of his constituents. He claimed that the city manager “isn’t fully in touch with what’s going on on the ground there,” implying that, somehow, he personally was.

Trump and Vance have chosen to double down on these distinctly unproven claims about a group of vulnerable people, because that is precisely what they have been doing for the entirety of their campaign. At his rallies, Trump has repeatedly cited instances of “migrant crime” ripped right from the pages of tabloids in an attempt to motivate voters to support his fascist plan for mass deportations.

Vance said his constituents reported seeing “abductions with their own eyes.” Earlier that day, Vance had said it was entirely possible that the rumors would “turn out to be false.” With his blatant flip-flopping, it’s clear that Vance doesn’t actually care whether the rumors are true.

“What do I think is a bigger problem: insulting 20,000 people or the fact that my constituents can’t live a good life because Kamala Harris opened the border? I think it’s Kamala Harris needs to do her job, and make people happier and healthier in this country,” Vance said Tuesday night before walking off.

After Taylor Swift endorsed Kamala Harris Tuesday night, the worst person you know decided to weigh in.

Elon Musk had disgusting things to say after reading Swift’s Instagram post supporting Harris for president. “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life,” wrote Musk on X. Talk about weird.

Musk’s response is in reference to Swift’s sign-off in her post, where she self-identified as a “childless cat lady,” a dig at J.D. Vance’s continuous attacks on single women. In her Instagram photo, the pop star is holding one of her three cats, Benjamin Button. Swift also criticized Donald Trump for using A.I.-generated images of her to make it appear that she was supporting him.

Though it’s not clear exactly what bump Swift’s endorsement might give Harris, clearly it was big enough to trigger the billionaire funding Trump’s ground campaign.

Musk is known for threatening to spread his seed as part of the pro-natalist movement and regularly stokes fear about birth rates. But before Musk threatens to impregnate another female musician, maybe he should focus on his own problems, like winning his custody battle with former girlfriend Grimes over three of his 12 known children.

After falling short in his debate with Kamala Harris Tuesday night, Donald Trump is lashing out at his favorite network.

Speaking on Fox News Wednesday morning, Trump told Fox & Friends that he would prefer Sean Hannity, Jesse Watters, or Laura Ingraham to moderate any future debate, saying that Watters “was fantastic last night, what he said.”

“Jesse really got it. Jesse said that Trump won that debate. We won that debate by a lot. No, I wouldn’t want Martha involved. But I would take some others, yeah,” Trump said, arguing that Bret Baier and Martha McCallum aren’t qualified to moderate.

The small amount of praise that Trump received Tuesday night came from Hannity and Watters. Hannity said that the biggest loser in the debate was ABC, while Watters, trying to spin the debate in favor of the former president, said that “all of the memorable lines were from Donald Trump.”

Trump may not be willing to admit it, but he probably knows that his debate performance was a disaster. Harris’s strategy Tuesday night was to bait Trump into being himself and shooting his mouth off, and she succeeded, getting him to sound like right-wing mad libs at times. He went on a long-winded, inaccurate rant about Afghanistan, claimed that he had “concepts of a plan” on health care, and gave a disturbing answer about January 6.

Getting friendlier moderators may be the only way Trump could look better in a future debate. But it’s a very long shot that Kamala Harris would agree to a debate with his favorite anchors, as she already rejected a Fox News debate that Trump wanted to have on September 4. Plus, there’s the well-known fact that the conservative network is biased toward Trump and wants him to win. If Trump wants another debate, he’s going to have to go to a network that his supporters don’t run. Is he desperate enough to take the risk of being trounced again?

Donald Trump is trying to make it sound like Kamala Harris is creating transgender people from scratch, like his beloved “late great Hannibal Lecter.”

“Now she wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison,” said Trump during the debate on Tuesday, sounding like your weird estranged grandfather at Christmas dinner.

The line quickly went viral for its truly wild combination of words in successive order.

If we want to give Trump a modicum of the benefit of the doubt, which it’s not really clear he deserves, the Republican nominee may have been referring to a recently uncovered 2019 American Civil Liberties Union questionnaire.

In the survey, Harris was asked if she would use “executive authority to ensure that transgender and non-binary people who rely on the state for medical care—including those in prison and immigration detention—will have access to comprehensive treatment associated with gender transition, including all necessary surgical care.”

Harris replied, “Yes.”

But Harris, in her support for gender-affirming surgery several years ago, certainly isn’t making that a central part of her platform in 2024. 

Fearmongering about trans people and migrants is nothing new for Trump, though. At a Moms for Liberty conference earlier this month, Trump went on a similar rant when he alleged that public schools will provide surgery to a transgender minor without parental consent. “Think of it; your kid goes to school, and he comes home a few days later with an operation,” Trump said. “The school decides what’s going to happen with your child.” There is no evidence that any schools do such a thing, even with parental permission. However, that didn’t stop Moms for Liberty from thanking Trump for the lie.

But Trump never let the truth get in his way before.

During Tuesday night’s presidential debate, Donald Trump had a long-winded, barely coherent answer about his administration’s Afghanistan policy, where the U.S. was negotiating with the Taliban.

Trump claimed that the Taliban was killing a lot of U.S. soldiers with snipers, and that he spoke to “Abdul,” who he claimed was and is the head of the Taliban, warning him against continuing those murders. Trump said that “Abdul” asked, “Why do you send me a picture of my house?”

Trump, by his own account, purportedly responded, “You’re going to have to figure that out, Abdul,” and said that for 18 months, no U.S. soldiers were killed.

In reality, almost none of this is true. The head of the Taliban since 2016 has been a cleric named Hibatullah Akhundzada, although one of the Taliban’s negotiators with the United States was Abdul Ghani Baradar, one of Akhundzada’s deputies. A former Wall Street Journal reporter also notes that the Taliban didn’t use snipers often and was more effective at killing people with IEDs.

Nor did Trump oversee an 18-month stretch where no U.S. soldiers were killed. There was one such stretch where no U.S. service members were killed in combat, but it happened from March 2020 to August 2021, half of which was during Joe Biden’s presidency.

Last month, Trump’s former national security adviser, General H.R. McMaster, told CNN that Trump’s negotiations with the Taliban resulted in the U.S. forcing the Afghan government to release 5,000 members of the extremist organization, a fact that Kamala Harris was only too happy to point out during the debate in her takedown of his word salad.

Trump tried to claim Tuesday night that if he were president during the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, it would have gone a lot differently and favorably, with no U.S. casualties. In reality, it would have likely gone as badly, if not worse, and Trump would have had the benefit of a compliant right-wing media backing him to the hilt.