PolitiFact: 73 Percent of Trump's Statements Are False

March 01, 2016

Writer

PolitiFact has looked at Donald Drumpf's statements and finds that 73 percent of his statements are false.

"He is a sociopathic liar. He doesn't care. He may not even know he's lying anymore. He just believes whatever it is that he makes up in his own head," Glenn said Tuesday on The Glenn Beck Program. "You'll never see his income tax. Not because there's something going on there. But because the people who have worked with him closely for over ten years estimate his net value, his net worth at $150 million."

Should that be true, what would it say about the character of man who refuses to release tax returns so people won't find out his whole life is a lie?

Additionally, it's well-documented that Drumpf quickly turns from friend to foe should he feel threatened.

"If you don't do him a solid, he destroys you," Glenn said.

Here's a sampling of Drumpf's grade school name-calling:

Erick Erickson — a total low life

Arianna Huffington — a liberal clown

Chuck Todd — pathetic

Charles Krauthammer — a loser and a jerk

Bob Vander Plaats — a phony and a con man

Glenn Beck — a dopey idiot

An article today in the Weekly Standard, written by Stephan Hayes, makes one ponder this pertinent question:

If Drumpf condemns anyone he dislikes, why does he go soft on David Duke and the KKK?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: It's Super Tuesday, and it's much more serious than it sounds, the responsibility on each of our shoulders today, to do our homework before we walk into our polling locations. The fate of America rests on your shoulders. But no pressure. We start there, right now.

(music)

GLENN: Hello, America. And welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. Today from Washington, DC, and the studios at WMAL, I want to thank 1000 KTOK for hosting us yesterday in Oklahoma City and WMAL for hosting us today in Washington, DC, as we prepare for CPAC that is happening this weekend. We'll be broadcasting from there Thursday and Friday and talked to some of the people at CPAC. Max Lucado is going to be on with us today, as is Ted Cruz.

It is Super Tuesday. 25 percent of all the delegates will be assigned by tomorrow morning. And it's going to be pretty hard to -- to stop Donald Drumpf at this point. Not impossible. But pretty hard to stop. I'm looking at the news today, and I find it interesting that all of these people are coming out with these plans to stop Donald Drumpf.

And the one I keep hearing about is insanity. And it's Marco Rubio's plan, not to win any of the -- any of the contest today. His plan is not to win any of the contest, but to believe just to have enough delegates to go to a brokered convention. The other plan is to have the G.O.P. kick Donald out and run somebody else in his stead.

What kind of banana republic do we live in? I am not a fan of Donald Drumpf, nor will I vote for Donald Drumpf. But I have to tell you, if the American people say they're going to vote for Donald Drumpf, the G.O.P. was the one that made the deal. The G.O.P. was the one that said, "You have to run -- you can't run for third party." You think you're going to take his delegates away and not start a civil war? You think you're going to kick him out of the party and not start a civil war?

The G.O.P. is done. They're just done. They didn't get it. They have no idea why Donald Drumpf has any kind of traction at all. And none of their plans include the guy who is number two in the delegate count. They refuse to look at the guy who actually is going to win some states today. Why?

Because he's anti-establishment. Because he will stop all of this nonsense that's happening in Washington. So why get behind that guy? You got to get behind the guy that doesn't win any states. That doesn't make any sense.

Because the establishment is still all about power. It's all about control. We have gone down this road now of progressivism far too long. And people don't see it. I got up this morning and I was thinking about it. I was watching the news and I thought, "You know, it's amazing to me -- it's amazing to me. This guy, Donald Drumpf, would be laughed out if he was running for Democrats. We would laugh at him. We would all say, oh, my gosh, bring it on. Exactly what Hillary Clinton doing."

There's a new story out about how Hillary Clinton is salivating at Donald Drumpf. By the way, new poll out shows Donald Drumpf does not beat Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton in a head-to-head. And they haven't even begun. Look at what the New York Times said yesterday.

New York Times has an off the record, confidential meeting with Donald Drumpf back in January. Where supposedly he said, "Look, everything is negotiable. Don't worry about it. I know you're all freaked out." But basically what he said -- what was it on Greta, I can be anything. I'm going to be changing rapidly once I get the nomination. I'll be changing rapidly. I can be whatever I need to be at the time. Basically he said that, apparently to the New York Times, in a confidential meeting, that everything is negotiable, and the stuff he's saying on the border, don't worry about.

Well, I called yesterday for Donald Drumpf to demand that the New York Times release that audiotape. Because they said they will, but they can't release it because it was a confidential meeting. And they can't release it without his permission. But if they ask, if Donald Drumpf asks, they will release it.

Well, I think this is an outrageous lie by the New York Times. Donald Drumpf has said many times that he thinks one of the biggest liars is the New York Times. I happen to agree with him. I think that he should demand that the New York Times produce that tape. And show that he did not indeed say those things.

Except he was on Hannity last night, talking about it. When he spoke to Sean, he said, "Well, look, yes, a lot of things are negotiable. But the New York Times is a liar." Well, if the New York Times is a liar, you should -- you should demand that the tape be released and then sue them.

Don, I know you love to sue them. You love to sue them. Suing is a way of life with you. Because to quote you: You get greedy. And you say, "Give me the money. Give me the money." And you grab and you grab and you grab. That's a quote from you.

So I know you're greedy, which is another beautiful, wonderful, uge, Christian characteristic. But I know you get greedy and you want to grab. So sue them. Because you have them dead to rights. They are hurting your reputation by saying that you are telling the American people one thing and doing the exact opposite. Because we know you would never do that. That's ridiculous to assume and insulting to you.

He won't call for the release of that tape. Guarantee it. Because I bet you my house, that what's on that tape is exactly what the New York Times says is on that tape. Because Donald Drumpf is a liar.

Nobody wants to hear that about people. PolitiFact has looked at his statements and 76 percent of his statements -- or, 73 percent of his statements are false.

He is a sociopathic liar. He doesn't care. He may not even know he's lying anymore. He just believes whatever it is that he makes up in his own head. You'll never see his income tax. Not because there's something going on there. But because the people who have worked with him closely for over ten years estimate his net value, his net worth at $150 million.

Just so you can put that into perspective, that's what -- that's about what Forbes magazine says I'm worth. So that knocks Donald Drumpf down lots of pegs. By the way, I'm not worth that.

But imagine if it meant something to me. What would that say something about my character, if I was like, "No, I'm worth more than that. Oh, man, how dare they say that I'm only worth $150 million. I'm worth a billion dollars. I'm worth $500 million." What would that say about me?

I laugh at the numbers that they always quote from me because that's what my company does in revenue. That's not what I get paid. One of my companies hasn't even paid me in five years.

But what would it say about a man's character if you wouldn't release your tax returns because you just didn't want people to know how much you really are worth because your whole life is a lie?

The other thing that I think Donald Drumpf, the reason why he's not releasing his tax returns, is because he's not as charitable as he says he is. He says he's been giving money for years to vets. My guess is, his charitable contributions are less than 2 percent. I'll bet you that they're zero. But definitely worth less than 2 percent.

He raises money through the Drumpf Foundation or the Drumpf -- he goes and asks other people to give money. And then he doesn't give money himself.

And, by the way, there's people asking now, "Why hasn't he delivered on the charity funds that he promised in Iowa?" You would think -- I don't even understand this story. You have -- you've selected the charities, why haven't you given the money to the charities? The money is there, you've selected the charities, why haven't you just released the funds?

Anybody see the John Oliver, just amazing monologue of 20 minutes taking down Donald Drumpf? Stu, Pat, Jeffy, have you seen -- you saw the whole monologue?

PAT: Yeah. We talked about some of it yesterday.

STU: Yeah. We talked about some of --

GLENN: Yeah, go ahead.

STU: We talked about some of it yesterday. And one of the things we talked about was that he had the exact same experience we had with Donald Drumpf, in which Drumpf also accused him and Jon Stewart of wanting him on the show and Drumpf said no. So that's the only reason those people hate him, which is the exact same thing he said about us. And not true in either circumstance.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: Can you imagine thinking so much of yourself that if somebody -- if you tell somebody you're not going to do an interview with them, that that's the sole reason that they don't like you from then on. I mean, that's -- you think a lot of yourself when it's just, "Wow, he didn't do an interview with us. So now we hate his guts and we're going to destroy this man." It's so pathetic.

GLENN: Not only how much do you think of yourself, what do you think the world is like? I mean, what kind of world do you live in, where because -- it's usually self-diagnosis. You know, when somebody like this says something about you. They're usually diagnosing themself. They see the things in others that is in them.

So he is like that. If you don't do him a solid, he destroys you. And so he thinks that everybody else -- because you won't do an interview. I won't do an interview. You must want to destroy me. No, that's you in your sick, twisted world. That's you, man.

STU: Yeah. And the Weekly Standard had a great point on this today, which is -- I mean, we all know the way -- what Drumpf does with people he doesn't like. What does he do to people he doesn't like? Erick Erickson, a total low-life. Arianna Huffington, a liberal clown. Chuck Todd, pathetic. Charles Krauthammer, a loser and a clown. Bill Kristol, a sad case. Bob Vander Plaats is a phony and a con man.

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: Jeez.

STU: We already know, the things he's called Glenn fills up a whole page of the New York Times insult list. In fact, the New York Times provided a catalog of the 199 people, places, and things Donald Drumpf has insulted on Twitter. A complete list, which, of course, is not actually a complete list.

But here's the point from the Weekly Standard which is brilliant today: After a year of his candidacy, the political world knows well what it looks like when Donald Drumpf wants to offer an unequivocal condemnation. When it comes to David Duke and the KKK, we still haven't seen one.

He hasn't called David Duke a loser. He hasn't called David Duke a scumbag. He hasn't called David Duke a jerk or a phony or a con man.

PAT: Right. And why? Because he supports him.

STU: Because he supports him.

GLENN: What do you think about Rush Limbaugh's excuse for this? He said yesterday that Donald Drumpf was on the Sunday shows, and they have more gravitas. They get more play than just the Megyn Kelly or Sean Hannity or something like that. And so he was on those Sunday shows and he was worried about the poll numbers because the debate didn't go well. And so he just didn't want to alienate anyone who might vote for him. So it's not really an excuse. I mean, it's still really bad. But it's at least a reason why he didn't do it. Do you buy into any of that?

STU: I actually kind of do. But the -- it's funny because people are saying, "Well, this is an excuse he's providing." Actually it's the accusation. The accusation is that he's pandering to white supremacists.

PAT: That's not a good excuse.

STU: It's not an excuse. It's actually we're accusing him of.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: And I think that is exactly what he's doing. I mean, I don't know that anyone is saying that he -- while there is certainly long-term evidence and it will be exploited like crazy that he has bad racial tendencies, I don't think he's throwing a hood on him Friday nights. That's not what I think Donald Drumpf is doing.

GLENN: No, he's not a Klan member. He's not a Klan member.

STU: But he's pandering to these people like crazy. And that's not a positive. That's actually the negative we're accusing him of. So I don't know if Rush framed that as an excuse. But it's actually the thing I'm complaining about.

PAT: I think the hoodies are for Tuesdays and Thursdays. Not Fridays.

STU: Okay. Sorry.

GLENN: Let me give you one thing real quick, and then I have to take a break.

There's a new poll out in Florida. 38 percent of Floridians believe that Ted Cruz might be the Zodiac Killer. The serial killer from, what? A decade ago? Or two decades ago? The serial killer in Florida.

38 percent of Floridians believe that Ted Cruz is the Zodiac Killer. We'll get into it in a second. But I just want to say this, even with Floridians believing that he's the Zodiac Killer, he still beats Marco Rubio in Florida. (laughter)

Featured Image: Screenshot of The Glenn Beck Program broadcasting from WMAL in Washington, D.C.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Glenn's Show Prep