I started fact-checking Trump 10 years ago. Here are 15 things I’ve learned

Ten years ago this month, in my old job as Washington correspondent for the Toronto Star, I started what I believed would be a quick little side project: fact-checking underdog presidential candidate Donald Trump, who was telling a remarkable number of lies but was rarely being corrected. Like a lot of people, I thought Trump would lose the 2016 election.

I was very wrong. And Trump continued to be very wrong, about a dizzying variety of subjects, for the next decade.

His relentless dishonesty has become a central feature of US and world politics. Voters and members of Congress, allies and adversaries, CEOs and investors alike have had to try to figure out how to read a man whose words are so frequently not true.

How frequently? Two months before Election Day in 2020, I had to abandon my four-year-old project of fact-checking each and every Trump statement. He was telling so many campaign lies that I’d become physically unable to look into all of them while living something loosely resembling a healthy life. By then, I’d recorded more than 8,500 false claims since September 2016.

I took a brief break from Trump-checking when he left office in 2021, replaced by a Democratic president with his own accuracy problems but nowhere near the volume or variety of Trump’s falsehoods. And then, less than two years later, Trump was back at the top of the news. I counted more than 20 false or misleading claims in his 2022 speech launching his third presidential campaign. He has not gotten any more factual since.

Since I joined CNN as a fact-check reporter in 2019, I’ve devoted most of my reporting time to the nuts-and-bolts work of separating fact from fiction. But spending hundreds of hours immersed in Trump’s rhetoric has given me some insights and personal opinions about the nature of his lying, how it is received by the public and how it is covered by the media.

Ten years in, here are 15 thoughts.

Joe Biden sometimes lied, JD Vance sometimes lies, Republicans and Democrats in Congress sometimes lie, Cabinet secretaries notably including Robert F. Kennedy Jr. sometimes lie; Washington is not the nation’s capital of straight shooting. But it’s abundantly clear that there is no public official in Washington who lies like Trump – not as constantly, not as obviously, not about as many topics. I’ve heard people dismiss Trump’s mendacity with a shrugging “they all lie,” but we are witnessing a rare, very possibly once-in-a-lifetime political liar.

Trump’s most concerted lying sprees have come in response to political difficulties: the 2018 midterms in which his party was flailing, the 2019 Ukraine scandal that led to his first impeachment, the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic that was harming his political prospects and the 2020 election he lost . When Trump gets in trouble, he ramps up the dishonesty – even in the cases where dishonesty created some of the trouble in the first place.

A lot of people expect politicians to try to lie their way out of a career-threatening jam or lie to make their signature policies look better. The subjects Trump has lied about include a nonexistent phone call he claimed to have received from the Boy Scouts, a nonexistent Michigan “Man of the Year” award he claimed to have received years ago, and whether there were any empty seats in venues in which seats were visibly empty . None of these things are important in the slightest, but Trump’s brain has seen fit to make up a story about them. It’s a special trait.

People sometimes ask how I can debunk Trump lies immediately after he utters them. I don’t have any magic tricks. My (non-)secret is that he says the same untrue things again and again. The first time, it might take a while to research; by the 10th or 100th time, I can recite the debunking half-asleep – and there actually is a 100th time for some of the lies.

Like a bad poker player, Trump has tells that indicate he is likely lying. If he delivers a story featuring an unnamed person calling him “sir,” it’s often fiction . So are many of his stories about burly working-class men crying in his presence and a good portion of his stories involving one of his critics supposedly having come to him begging. What do these colorful but dubious tales have in common? They position him as a dominant figure to whom others – even large dudes – genuflect.

Poll numbers , inflation numbers , investment numbers , gas-price numbers , foreign policy numbers , crowd-size numbers , virtually every other kind of number – a staggering percentage of the figures Trump uses are incorrect. Even when an accurate statistic would make him look good, the businessman who used to inflate his reality show ratings and the size of his buildings tends to choose an inaccurate statistic that would make him look a little better. If “sir” is one of the best indications he is not telling the truth, so is him simply using a figure, any figure.

Trump has concocted hundreds of lies for his own advantage. But many of the laughable conspiracy theories he has promoted were borrowed from other people, and he often appears to truly believe them. That might be worse, not better. The most powerful person in the world, with access to endless expertise upon request, is not only a fabulist but a frequent dupe for other fabulists.

Unless you count blocking me on Twitter in 2017, Trump has never publicly acknowledged my existence. But he has sometimes acknowledged he’s aware of fact checks – while simultaneously sticking with the lies those fact checks corrected, evidently shameless about having had to be corrected.

For example, Trump has repeatedly noted that people have pointed out his claim that Biden presided over the very highest inflation in US history as incorrect. But then Trump has immediately gone on to repeat the very-highest-ever claim once more, insisting he still believes it. “Some people will correct me because they always love to correct me, even though I’m right about everything,” he said , piling another lie on top of the initial one, during a December rendition of the routine.

During Trump’s first term, White House aides would rarely respond to reporters’ questions about his lies; after all, it’s hard to defend the indefensible. But now he has surrounded himself with people willing to try. During his second term, official spokespeople regularly declare him “right” about things he is demonstrably wrong about. In a Republican ecosystem currently dominated by Trump loyalists, it’s far from career-ending to shred your credibility with the mainstream media in service of the boss.

Pro-Trump media entities have shown embarrassingly little interest in addressing his lies. But more neutral outlets have regularly failed, too. On the last full day of Trump’s first presidency in 2021, I wrote , “Too often, coverage of flagrantly dishonest Trump speeches still mentioned the dishonesty in passing or not at all. Too often, coverage still quoted the president’s lies without explaining that they were wrong.” More than five years later, these problems persist.

There are various reasons for that, including reflexive adherence to old habits, a Trump-driven deluge of breaking news and the diminished number of employed reporters. (CNN is one of very few outlets that has a full-time political fact-checker.) One of the key explanations, though, is one I wrote about back in 2017 : “Trump is a human version of computer hackers’ denial-of-service attacks, flooding systems with more disinformation than they are designed to handle.” If a politician tells one blatant lie, it’s likely to get heavy coverage; if a politician tells blatant lies every week for years, it’s likely that most outlets will cease viewing them as news and that the majority will be treated as background noise.

In other words, the media strategy that former Trump White House official Steve Bannon memorably described in 2018 – “flood the zone with sh*t” – has proved effective in getting lots of falsehoods into the public discourse virtually unchallenged.

When I give speeches about my work reporting on Trump’s lies, one of the most common questions I get from the audience is some variation of, “Thank you, but it’s clear that nobody cares, right?” I argue that this is false, too. It’s clear that millions of Americans either don’t believe debunkings from mainstream outlets or aren’t interested in them, but it’s also clear that millions of Americans want to know when and how the president is trying to deceive them.

Polls spanning Trump’s entire career have found that somewhere around twice as many Americans do not think he is honest and trustworthy as think he is honest and trustworthy. He’s won two presidential elections, of course, but it’s not like he’s ever convinced the entire population to stop caring about whether he is telling the truth.

Facts would matter even if only a few people were seeking them out. Fortunately, it’s far more than a few.

One of my most eye-opening journalistic experiences was a 2017 reporting trip to two Trump-friendly communities in Ohio. Over and over, I heard the president’s supporters say not merely that they didn’t mind his lying but that they actively liked it – because it agitated the establishment they had come to despise. (“We’ve had so much crap in Washington for years, and now we have someone shaking ’em up really good,” one man told me with delight.) I know that many Trump supporters often don’t know he’s lying or believe his policy stances outweigh the dishonesty. But I’ve also come to understand that there is a pro-dishonesty constituency within his base, at least when that dishonesty is perceived to target the “right” people.

I observed this phenomenon with the first frequent political liar I covered, the bellicose former Toronto mayor Rob Ford. A politician who gives the impression that they authentically speak their mind is likely to be seen by many as honest even if a high proportion of their actual words are not true. Trump has always done badly in honesty polling, but his insult-heavy, damn-the-teleprompters style has also helped convince a segment of the populace that he is not only reasonably truthful but especially truthful.

When Trump lies about a military deal with South Korea or Canada’s agricultural policies or the actions of some Democrat somewhere, the average voter may not know or much care that he is wildly inaccurate. When he lies that every price is lower than when he took office, or that almost every price is falling “rapidly,” even his most fervent supporters can see with their own eyes that he’s trying to trick them. I suspect that his disastrous present polling on the cost of living, and generally poor approval ratings , are connected not only to inflation itself but also his decision to aggressively deny it exists.

Some of Trump’s lies are so bizarre or trivial that I can’t help but laugh. On the whole, though, his lies have been deeply harmful to the country. People died because of the Capitol riot prompted by his lies about the 2020 election. His lies downplaying Covid-19 almost certainly led to deaths , too. Specific people targeted by his lies, including journalists , judges and election workers , have faced threats and harassment. His lies have worsened innumerable public debates around critical policy issues. And American democracy itself is worse off for all the lying, too.

十年前的这个月，我还在《多伦多星报》担任驻华盛顿记者时，开始了一个当时我认为只是个小项目的工作：核实当时不被看好的总统候选人唐纳德·特朗普的言论。他谎话连篇，却鲜有人纠正。和很多人一样，我当时也认为特朗普会输掉2016年的总统大选。

我大错特错了。在接下来的十年里，特朗普在各种各样的问题上都继续犯着严重的错误。

他屡屡撒谎已成为美国乃至世界政治的核心特征。选民和国会议员、盟友和对手、首席执行官和投资者都不得不努力弄明白，如何才能读懂这个经常说谎的人的话。

频率如何？2020年大选前两个月，我不得不放弃我持续了四年的项目——核实特朗普的每一条言论。他在竞选期间谎话连篇，我实在无法在维持正常生活的同时逐一核实。到那时，自2016年9月以来，我已经记录了超过8500条虚假言论。

2021年特朗普卸任后，我曾短暂地停止了对他的言论进行核查。接任的是一位民主党总统，他虽然也有自己的言论不准确之处，但远不及特朗普谎言的数量和种类。然而，不到两年，特朗普又重回新闻头条。在他2022年启动第三次总统竞选的演讲中，我统计到有超过20条虚假或误导性言论。此后，他的言论也丝毫没有变得更加客观。

自2019年加入CNN担任事实核查记者以来，我的大部分报道时间都投入在辨别事实与虚构的繁琐工作上。但数百小时沉浸在特朗普的言论中，让我对他的谎言本质、公众的反应以及媒体的报道方式有了一些见解和个人看法。

十年过去了，以下是我的15条感想。

乔·拜登有时会撒谎，JD·万斯有时会撒谎，国会的共和党人和民主党人有时会撒谎，包括小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪在内的内阁部长们有时也会撒谎；华盛顿并非以坦诚直言著称。但显而易见的是，华盛顿没有任何一位公职人员像特朗普那样撒谎——没有他那么频繁，没有他那么明目张胆，也没有他撒谎的话题那么广泛。我曾听到有人耸耸肩，轻描淡写地说“他们都撒谎”，以此来否定特朗普的谎言，但我们正在目睹一位罕见的、很可能百年一遇的政治骗子。

特朗普最肆无忌惮的谎言往往都源于政治困境：2018年中期选举，当时他的政党举步维艰；2019年乌克兰丑闻导致他首次遭到弹劾；2020年新冠疫情损害了他的政治前景；以及他最终输掉的2020年总统大选。每当特朗普陷入困境，他就会变本加厉地撒谎——即便在某些困境中，正是谎言本身造成了部分麻烦。

很多人都预料到，政客们会试图用谎言摆脱可能危及职业生涯的困境，或者为了让自己的标志性政策看起来更好而撒谎。特朗普撒谎的话题包括：他声称接到过一个根本不存在的童子军电话；他声称多年前获得过一个根本不存在的密歇根州“年度人物”奖；以及在一些明明有空位的场所，他是否真的有空位。这些事情根本无关紧要，但特朗普却偏偏要编造故事来佐证。这真是他的一个“特殊”本性。

人们有时会问我，为什么我能在特朗普撒谎后立刻揭穿他。我没有什么魔法。我的（不）秘诀在于，他会一遍又一遍地重复同样的谎言。第一次，我可能需要花点时间去查证；但到了第十次甚至第一百次，我就能半梦半醒地背诵出那些被揭穿的内容——而且有些谎言真的能重复一百遍。

就像蹩脚的扑克玩家一样，特朗普也有一些蛛丝马迹表明他很可能在撒谎。如果他讲的故事里有个不知名的人称呼他“先生”，那通常都是虚构的。他讲的很多关于身材魁梧的工人阶级男子在他面前痛哭流涕的故事，以及他讲述的很多批评者前来乞求他的故事，也都是虚构的。这些生动却可疑的故事有什么共同之处呢？它们都把他塑造成一个高高在上的权威人物，其他人——即使是身材魁梧的壮汉——也对他毕恭毕敬。

民调数据、通胀数据、投资数据、油价数据、外交政策数据、人群规模数据，几乎所有其他类型的数据——特朗普使用的数据中，有相当一部分是错误的。即使准确的统计数据能让他看起来更好，这位曾经夸大真人秀收视率和建筑规模的商人，也往往会选择一个不准确的数据来让自己看起来稍微好一些。如果说“先生”是他说谎的最佳证据之一，那么他随便使用一个数字，哪怕只是一个数字，也同样如此。

特朗普为了自己的利益捏造了数百个谎言。但他宣扬的许多荒谬阴谋论都是从别人那里借来的，而且他似乎常常真的相信这些谎言。这或许更糟，而不是更好。这个世界上最有权势的人，可以随时获取无穷无尽的专业知识，不仅是一个爱编故事的人，而且还经常被其他爱编故事的人蒙蔽。

除非你把2017年他在推特上屏蔽我这件事也算进去，否则特朗普从未公开承认过我的存在。但他有时会承认他知道事实核查——同时却坚持那些被事实核查纠正的谎言，显然对被纠正这件事毫无羞耻之心。

例如，特朗普曾多次声称有人指出他关于拜登执政期间美国通货膨胀率创历史新高的说法是错误的。但随后，他又立即重复了这一说法，坚称自己仍然相信。在去年12月的一次讲话中，他再次重复了这一说法，并抛出了一个谎言：“有些人会纠正我，因为他们总是喜欢纠正我，即使我说的都是对的。”

在特朗普的第一任期内，白宫幕僚很少回应记者关于他谎言的提问；毕竟，为无法辩解的事情辩护是很难的。但现在他身边聚集了一群愿意尝试的人。在他的第二任期内，官方发言人经常宣称他在一些他明显错误的事情上“是对的”。在目前由特朗普忠实拥护者主导的共和党生态系统中，为了迎合老板而损害自己在主流媒体的信誉，远非断送职业生涯。

支持特朗普的媒体机构对揭露他的谎言表现出令人尴尬的冷漠。但较为中立的媒体也常常失职。在2021年特朗普首个总统任期的最后一天，我写道：“对于特朗普公然撒谎的演讲，媒体报道往往只是轻描淡写地提及，甚至只字不提。媒体报道也常常引用总统的谎言，却不解释其错误之处。”五年多过去了，这些问题依然存在。

造成这种情况的原因有很多，包括人们习惯性地墨守成规、特朗普引发的铺天盖地的突发新闻以及记者人数的减少。（CNN是极少数拥有全职政治事实核查员的媒体之一。）不过，其中一个关键的解释是我在2017年写过的：“特朗普就像是人间版的黑客拒绝服务攻击，他向系统倾泻的虚假信息远远超过了系统的处理能力。”如果一个政客撒谎一次，很可能会得到大量报道；但如果一个政客每周都撒谎，而且持续数年，那么大多数媒体很可能不再把这些谎言视为新闻，而将其视为背景噪音。

换句话说，前特朗普白宫官员史蒂夫·班农在 2018 年令人印象深刻地描述的媒体策略——“用垃圾信息淹没该领域”——已被证明是有效的，它使得大量谎言几乎不受挑战地进入了公共话语。

当我发表关于我报道特朗普谎言的工作时，听众最常问我的问题之一就是：“谢谢，但很明显没人关心这些，对吧？” 我也认为这种说法是错误的。显然，数百万美国人要么不相信主流媒体的辟谣报道，要么对此不感兴趣，但同样显而易见的是，数百万美国人想知道总统何时以及如何试图欺骗他们。

纵观特朗普整个政治生涯，民调显示，认为他不诚实、不可信的美国人数量大约是认为他诚实、可信的美国人数量的两倍。当然，他赢得了两届总统大选，但这并不意味着他曾经让全体民众不再关心他是否说真话。

即使只有少数人寻求事实，事实也依然重要。幸运的是，寻求事实的人远远不止少数。

我最令人大开眼界的记者经历之一，是2017年去俄亥俄州两个特朗普支持者聚集的社区进行报道。我反复听到总统的支持者们说，他们不仅不介意他撒谎，而且还乐见其成——因为这激怒了他们一直鄙视的建制派。（一位男士欣喜地告诉我：“华盛顿这些年充斥着各种糟心事，现在终于有人来给他们好好搅一搅了。”）我知道很多特朗普的支持者往往不知道他在撒谎，或者认为他的政策立场足以弥补他的不诚实。但我也逐渐意识到，在他的支持者群体中，确实存在着一部分支持不诚实的人，至少当这种不诚实被认为是针对“正确”的目标时，他们就会这么认为。

我最早报道的惯于撒谎的政治人物，好战的前多伦多市长罗布·福特，就让我注意到了这种现象。一个政治人物如果给人一种真诚坦率的印象，即使他实际说的话中很大一部分并非事实，也容易被许多人视为诚实。特朗普在诚信民调中一直表现不佳，但他那充满侮辱性、不按提词器念稿的风格，也让一部分民众相信他不仅相当诚实，而且特别诚实。

当特朗普就与韩国的军事协议、加拿大的农业政策或某些民主党人的行动撒谎时，普通选民可能并不知道，或者根本不在乎他的说法有多么离谱。但当他谎称所有物价都比他上任时低，或者几乎所有物价都在“快速”下降时，即使是他最狂热的支持者也能一眼看出他是在欺骗他们。我怀疑，他目前在生活成本问题上的糟糕民调以及普遍低迷的支持率，不仅与通货膨胀本身有关，也与他极力否认通货膨胀的存在有关。

特朗普的一些谎言荒诞无稽，甚至有些琐碎，让我忍不住发笑。但总的来说，他的谎言对国家造成了深远的伤害。他关于2020年大选的谎言引发了国会大厦骚乱，导致人员死亡。他淡化新冠疫情的谎言几乎肯定也造成了人员死亡。他的谎言针对的特定人群，包括记者、法官和选举工作人员，都面临着威胁和骚扰。他的谎言加剧了无数围绕关键政策问题的公共辩论。而所有这些谎言也损害了美国的民主制度本身。