Were Trump’s Comments During Puerto Rico Visit ‘Insensitive’?

October 04, 2017

WRITER

Following a public clash with the mayor of San Juan, President Donald Trump visited Puerto Rico, a trip that went smoothly for the most part – although some of his remarks were not as diplomatic as they could have been.

“Now, I hate to tell you, Puerto Rico, but you’ve thrown our budget a little out of whack because we’ve spent a lot of money on Puerto Rico, and that’s fine,” Trump said in his address. “We’ve saved a lot of lives.”

Trump didn’t seem to realize that even though the government is working to help Puerto Rico, there are still a lot of people hurting and struggling.

“When you lay out facts that way, they come across insensitive,” Doc said on Wednesday’s show while filling in for Glenn.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

DOC: Doc Thompson in for Glenn along with Kris Cruz and Kal. We have to get on to other news including President Trump in Puerto Rico. Before we go any further, I am going to need a disclaimer at this point. I Doc Thompson support much of what the president has done and I think he has been unfairly criticized by the media. I didn't vote for him and I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton. I do support him as president and hope he does good things and I have given him fairly high marks on things like the Supreme Court nominee he put forth. Having said that, we will now criticize President Trump. Did you like that?

President Trump has been pretty good with the handling of natural disasters. He did what a president does. You open up the purse swings. There is going to be FEMA money, natural disaster, all of this. Both the governors of Florida and Texas did a good job for the two hurricanes that came through. But President Trump was very good there.

They tried to criticize him, they being the media and the left, for those two. It didn't happen. He did a pretty good job. For Puerto Rico, he did a good job early on but they were not letting it be and had to find ways to come out and criticize him.

I was fine with him criticizing the mayor of San Juan. She is clearly a leftist and was pretending like President Trump was leaving them high and dry even though he had opened up the purse springs and sent the military and National Guard and sent the trauma guard. Having said all of that, when he went to Puerto Rico he looked goofy.

KRIS: It is a sign I like from Trump. When he is visiting things like this, I was super excited. Everything he did literally checked by box.

DOC: Even the throwing the paper towels?

KRIS: We had a good follow-up. He knows he have good basketball players. I will give him that. He was like Puerto Rico, here is your chance.

DOC: He's a good jump shot. But at the full court press he is horrible. He is not playing good D or hustling to the other end of the court and where is his rebound.

If you want to apply him as a jump shot specialist that is fine but you have to play both ends of the court.

KRIS: I will give you that.

DOC: That is the type of sports take you normally don't get on the Glenn Beck program and by that, I mean sports talk.

His comments about money and the budget in Puerto Rico not inaccurate. I know he is a guy who just kind of throws it out there. You got to know you are going to step in it. I know he is not concerned about the media or the left criticizing him but you are not as effective of a leader when you say things like he said.

Here is President Trump talking about the budget:

I hate to tell you, Puerto Rico. You are throwing our budget out of whack because we have spent a lot of money on Puerto Rico and that is fine. We have saved a lot of lives. Every death is a horror but if you look at a real catastrophe like Katrina and the hundreds of people that died and you look at what happened here with really a storm that was just totally overpowering. Nobody has ever seen anything like this.

DOC: This goes to my point when we started the show we don't give each other the benefit of the doubt anymore. He brought it back a little bit when he said people have died. That is fine. He was drawing a comparison to Katrina and that is fine but that is going to get you in trouble every time. As much as many didn't give him the benefit of the doubt that he did not mean bad things, he also didn't realize there is a lot of people hurting right now. There is a lot of people in Puerto Rico that are struggling. When you lay out facts that way they come across insensitive and in normal circumstances we would say man up, get a little tougher there and that is fine. But while people are still in this much parallel. There are people that are still facing all kinds of challenges. Health challenges. Food and shelter challenges in Puerto Rico. Maybe it was a callus comparison and not good timing. Probably shouldn't have gone there.

I agree. But he was right with the comment about Puerto Rico mishandling their money. Even when I visited Puerto Rico, I looked around and I was like wait a minute. What is going on here? To be a beautiful island. Tourists in San Juan. And you have all this wasted money? Where is it going?

DOC: Puerto Rico just had a default. They went through billions of dollars. This has been something they have been struggling with for decades and keep trying to get out in front of it. There was a bond issue like a lot of different places in America.

States/cities. That was an issue. But you are supposed to plan for those things.

You are supposed to have politicians that say during the lean times when you have stuff coming in you have to put things away and plan for the lean times. Puerto Rico has had sketchy politician and people who have not done what is right. They are not prepared it. We are going to be on the hook at one point for the debt of loss of Puerto Rico like we would be anywhere else. One way or another that is coming. Trump even suggested that.

KRIS: Trump also said he is going to wipe out the debt.

DOC: How is he doing that?

KRIS: I do not know.

DOC: Anything owed to the government he has control over? I don't know if he can unilaterally do that. He likely has money owed through the executive branch like military where he could wipe it out by paying for it somewhere else or something but he is not exclusively in control nor is he to any bond debt that would be owed to people outside the Federal Government.

KRIS: This is a quote he said. He said they owe a lot of money to our friends on Wall Street and we are going to have to wipe that out. You are going to say Good-bye to that. I don't know if is Goldman Sachs or whoever it is but you can wave Good-bye to that.

DOC: He wasn't talking government or executive branch but people on Wall Street. Here is the problem. Wall Street is not some inanimate object not connected to people. Wall Street is a system of investors and ways to invest. Companies and organizations that govern or regulate or you invest through.

Who invests? People. It is easy to say you will have to say Good-bye to that. You will have to do that when you are not the one who loses money. It is not just Mr. Goldman Sachs and I have trillions and I am able to forgive a few million dollars here and there because I am wealthy, Mr. Goldman Sachs. No, Goldman Sachs is a company that invests money for people. If they say Good-bye to that money they are saying Good-bye to the money from people who invested in Puerto Rico. How about you are the little old lady in Indiana who invested part of your retirement in something that invested in Puerto Rico. Should she say Good-bye to that money? Of course not. There are risks that come with it and if that is what he meant that is fine. But if he means we should give that up, that is crazy. It is not for him to say.

KRIS: And the market responded.

DOC: If he is talking about a reset, of course we have to reset. There is going to be a reset in the market. Today? I don't know. Five years from now? I don't know. Eventually it will reset. That is what markets do. It is inflated right now. Eventually it will reset and whether that takes it down 1% or 40% that is what will happen.

KRIS: It dropped to 33 cents on the dollar where last month it was trading around 50 sent on the dollar.

DOC: Another clip of the president.

We will help the people. $72 billion in debt before the hurricane hit. They had a power plant that didn't work before the hurricane. We will help them do something and get it back on its feet. But I am just very, very proud of the fact, you know, if you look at one statistic, 16 deaths. That is a lot of deaths. If you look at Katrina it was in the thousands. We had FEMA here before the storm even came. They were on the island during the storm and before the first storm. They got hit by two hurricanes. We are very proud of the job we have done. Very, very proud. We will have to try to get them back. The power is slowly getting on. The roads are open. The runways are open. If these people you have met today, all of the different people, first responders, these are incredible people.

I totally agree.

DOC: He is accurate. FEMA was there. I give him props. The $72 billion is how much they were out and defaulted on. And power plant trouble, sure. What does he mean we will take care of that?

KRIS: That is another thing that scares me. Puerto Rico is my county. But what does that mean? If a president is saying hey, we are going to take care of it. Last time I checked, well this president has money, but last time I checked the government doesn't owe money. It is my money. So that means I am going to pay for it.

DOC: Exactly. Where is that coming from? It is fine to lead on this but if he was saying we are just going to pony up money I am happy to help people in Puerto Rico even with public funds but I need assurances just like I do in the rest of America that you are actually doing what you have to do. Balance your budget, start paying down the national debt, start finding a way to pay for the unfunded liabilities that will come up over the next 10 years, get your spending under control, come up with a new tax plan, repeal Obamacare. You have to do those things before you promise to build a power plant in Puerto Rico or bail them out of $72 billion.

If the president wants to lead on some sort of primarily private/public partnership, fine. Puerto Rico, there is an opportunity to make money for all of us for Puerto Rico to be a testing ground. It is three and a half, four million people? Not huge geographically wise. But I think broadcast market. San Juan is top 20 or top 15. And it is American territory. Those are Americans.

If you have to rebuild the grid, Kris, let's do it right. Let's do fiber optics and wi-fi throughout the island. The government can't pay for it but if you show people an investment opportunity and we say people of Puerto Rico, I as a private company, want to build and this will be a bigger tourist destination there is opportunities that way. Lead that way. That is awesome.

KRIS: We learned during the morning headlines that Google is sending wi-fi balloons to connect people back to the internet.

DOC: They are what?

KRIS: Sending hot wear balloons.

DOC: Google, one of the most profound technology companies in the world today, that has been a trendsetter for a decade or more and on the cutting edge of things we don't even understand, their big technological solution to helping Puerto Rico get wi-fi established is balloons? Come on?

KRIS: Wi-fi balloons.

DOC: Balloon technology? This is it. We are employing the most advanced balloon technology available. We are here to help. We have balloons. Stand by, Puerto Rico. Hang on, we are inflating them now. You will be up in no time. We have got our IT balloon guys on the ground. They have made landfall.

Doc Thompson in for Glenn Beck.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

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