The Claim
During his recent visit to the United Nations General Assembly, former U.S. President Donald Trump accused the UN (or parties associated with it) of orchestrating what he described as three “very sinister events” — a “triple sabotage” — to sabotage his appearance and credibility.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump asserted:
“A REAL DISGRACE took place at the United Nations yesterday — Not one, not two, but three very sinister events!”
-
Escalator malfunction — Trump and First Lady Melania were riding an escalator to the main speaking floor, which “came to a screeching halt.” He claimed they narrowly avoided falling onto the sharp metal edges of the steps.
-
Teleprompter failure — At the start of his address, the teleprompter reportedly went dark (“stone cold dark”), forcing him to speak without the cue screens for a portion of his speech.
-
Audio or sound system glitch — Trump claimed that the sound in the auditorium failed so none of the world leaders could hear him unless via earpieces; he said even Melania, seated in front, told him “I couldn’t hear a word you said.”
He demanded an immediate investigation, asked that UN preserve security camera footage (especially of the escalator’s emergency stop button), and said the Secret Service was involved. He also called for arrests of whoever was responsible.
Official Responses & Alternative Explanations
While Trump frames these as a coordinated attack, UN officials and observers offer more mundane explanations:
-
Escalator’s built‑in safety mechanism: The UN spokesperson, Stéphane Dujarric, said that the escalator stopped because its safety mechanism was triggered, possibly due to a videographer walking backwards on it, inadvertently activating the emergency stop function.
-
Teleprompter operated by the White House: The UN clarified that the teleprompter system is not controlled by the UN; rather, the White House (or Trump’s team) brings its own equipment. Thus, a failure of the teleprompter would not necessarily implicate the UN.
-
Sound system design & translation earpieces: The UN noted that its sound system is designed to deliver translated speech to delegates via earpieces; even if the public address system had issues, the delegates could hear via that arrangement.
-
Budget constraints / upkeep issues: Some commentators have pointed out that the UN has had infrastructure challenges and occasional outages in escalators or elevators, suggesting that not every failure is conspiratorial.
Hence, while Trump frames these events as deliberate sabotage, alternative explanations lean heavily toward mechanical safety systems, operator error, or routine audio/telecommunications design.
Why This Matters
Political Messaging & Narrative Control
Trump’s characterization of “triple sabotage” serves multiple rhetorical and political goals:
-
Victim narrative: By claiming sabotage, he positions himself as being maligned by powerful, shadowy forces — which fits a long pattern of his discourse.
-
Delegitimizing institutions: Accusing the UN (or its staff) of underhanded tactics fits a broader narrative of distrust toward international institutions.
-
Mobilizing supporters: It fuels suspicion among his base: if global institutions conspire against him, then he becomes a heroic figure resisting those powers.
The Burden of Proof
If one accuses sabotage or conspiracy, the burden is to supply compelling evidence — such as forensic data, logs, footage, chain of command, motive, and credible testimonies. Demanding arrests is a serious step, which hinges on proving intentional interference rather than mere technical failure.
Diplomatic & Reputational Impacts
Of course, public accusations like this raise tension between a high‑profile head of state (or former president) and an international body. Even if no formal inquiry yields a finding, the narrative will linger in media, shaping public perceptions of the UN’s neutrality and competence.
Tentative Conclusion
As of now, the claim of “three very sinister events” remains largely an assertion from Trump with no publicly verified proof beyond his statements. The UN’s explanations offer plausible, less dramatic alternatives.