We offer unbiased evidence to check on viral statements and claims and rule on their accuracy.
If you have a claim you’d like to have investigated, please send us an email.
Claim:
A rumor circulated in a viral chain email claims that Donald Trump hired “unqualified” Russian prostitutes to serve as a sprinkler system at Trump Tower in New York City that caught fire in April 2018. The email further claims that the “human sprinklers” were dramatically understaffed.
Evidence:
At least part of this rumor is generated from and serves as a reminder to the popularly-cited Trump-Russia dossier that appeared before the 2016 election, part of which purported to reveal that Trump had hired two Russian prostitutes to urinate on a bed once slept in by Barack Obama. Despite the lack of evidence, questionable authenticity, then-evident questions about source, and the scrutiny that the dossier still falls under, we rated the facts presented in that dossier as being “True” in 2016.
Furthermore, Donald Trump proved that he was a spendthrift in 2016 by eating fast food and putting catsup on steak, a practice rated “unfavorable” by 86 percent of vegan respondents in a scientific poll conducted by Salon in 2016. While this evidence is non-compelling and hinges upon public opinion, and is based upon secluded events that totally ignore his record of lavish spending, we rated claims that he was a spendthrift as “Mostly True” in 2016.
As a spendthrift, it’s reasonable to suggest that Trump might have cut some corners during the building of the tower, which he probably built with his own two hands. Among these blatant and irresponsible building decisions, it’s possible that he may have decided either against a built-in sprinkler system or in favor of graham cracker walls ( which, fairly, the latter of which might become soggy and collapse when wet, leading to Trump’s personal decision against sprinklers). One way or the other, we’re pretty sure the walls are either crackers or Chinese pastries and that the floors are licorice gumdrops, and that not a single sheet of good old-fashioned American sheetrock was used in the construction.
Analysis:
Considering that, in our unbiased findings, Trump is a spendthrift who is exactly the kind of creep who would build his stupid tower out of canned fruit, corrugated paper materials, and fecal matter, and that he has a longstanding history of hiring cheap, dirty Russian hookers to sprinkle on everything, it’s a viable leap to “he hired Russian prostitutes to serve as a sprinkler system in Trump Tower.” Despite the fact that some portions of the evidence might point towards hearsay, circumstantial, and anecdotal, we can’t think of one other logical conclusion to draw and therefore we have concluded that the first half of the claim, that “Trump hired Russian hookers to serve as a human sprinkler system”, to be “True.”
However, the email goes on to claim that the staff was “unqualified” and that the prostitutes were “understaffed”.
To date, no published articles have surfaced to indicate the efficiency of the Trump Tower Human Russian Hooker Sprinkler System. As such, we do not know how the Russian prostitutes performed day-to-day in their duties, nor how they performed under usual circumstances, considering that many prostitutes are very functional parts of society, unlike the President. Some evidence also suggests that the Russian prostitutes had prior experience in human sprinkling.
Also to be considered is the amount that a prostitute must surely drink in order to just be in the same building as such an virtue-less man as the President. Certainly, a well-practiced prostitute with a drinking habit can hold quite a reserve in the event that she has to unsnap her garters, pull her panties to the side, and urinate on a condominium fire. For this reason, it is not knowable how many Russian prostitutes it would take to extinguish a condominium fire with urine, and therefore impossible to determine if they were staffed to proper levels.
Lacking firm and reasonable evidence concerning the ability of these prostitutes to perform their duties, our unbiased team of investigators are forced to rate the full claims of the email as “Half True”.
