Jesse Watters’ UN Remarks Spark Backlash After On-Stage Malfunctions

24 September 2025

Jesse Watters (left); Melania and Donald Trump at the U.N. on Sept. 23. Credit : John Lamparski/Getty; Alexi J. Rosenfeld/Getty

On September 24, Fox News personality Jesse Watters ignited a storm of controversy after calling for the United Nations headquarters in New York to be bombed or demolished following technical malfunctions during President Donald Trump’s U.N. appearance. The ruptured moment came after the teleprompter cutting out mid-speech and a stalled escalator at the U.N. building forced the Trumps to walk up steps amid protest and spectacle.

Watters characterized the incidents as "an insurrection" and claimed they amounted to sabotage, targeting U.N. staff and officials. He went on air during The Five and alternatively suggested blowing up the building, gassing it, or having everyone vacate before demolition. Many of his co-hosts laughed, though one interjected “Let’s not do that.

The remarks landed like an incendiary salvo. A U.N. spokesperson later responded, explaining that the escalator’s safety mechanism was triggered by a videographer from the U.S. delegation who inadvertently caused the stoppage. As for the teleprompter, anonymous sources told ABC News that it was operated from the White House, not by U.N. staff.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt pledged a probe into whether the devices had been tampered with. She also said that if someone at the U.N. intentionally interrupted the escalator, they should be fired immediately. Meanwhile, Watters’ co-hosts Dana Perino, Greg Gutfeld, and others chimed in, at times clowning about repurposing the U.N. building into affordable housing even as Watters continued advocating for violent destruction.

Watters’ call drew immediate outrage. Critics across media and public forums called for his ouster, saying his threats crossed the line from provocative commentary to incitement. Many pointed out the chilling implications of rhetoric that frames an international institution as worthy of bombardment.

Some public figures noted that the escalation of language in political discourse is dangerous when delivered from platforms meant for mass audiences. The event feeds broader concerns over how media voices, especially on television, leverage violent language under the guise of satire, hyperbole, or blunt speech.

Watters attempted to tamp down reactions later, saying he understood why people were hurt by his comments and that "offense came from tone, not intent." He cited his admiration for Erika Kirk’s public forgiveness of her husband’s alleged killer and said he would continue speaking out against what he views as censorship or overreach in media oversight. Still, the damage was done. The interchange underscores a fraught moment in U.S. media where the boundary between outrageous spectacle and actionable threat has grown increasingly thin.