The suspension suspension - details on World Cup Soccer and politics

From Heather Cox Richardson, on FIFA and the suspension suspension thanks to tRump...

" Last week, U.S. Men’s National Soccer Team forward Folarin Balogun, the team’s top scorer, received a red card in a World Cup match against Bosnia-Herzegovina, suspending him for today’s game against Belgium. Then, on Sunday, the Disciplinary Committee of the international soccer governing body FIFA made a surprise announcement, saying that Balogun would be allowed a year-long probation, enabling him to play on Monday.

Folarin Balogun

Almost immediately, Sophia Cai of Politico reported that White House FIFA World Cup Task Force executive director Andrew Giuliani, the son of Trump ally Rudy Giuliani, told President Donald J. Trump about the suspension. As officials from the U.S. Soccer Federation prepared and submitted an appeal to FIFA, Giuliani and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick offered White House lawyers and dug into the professional history of the referee who had made the red card call. Then, on Thursday, Trump called FIFA president Gianni Infantino, with whom he has been friendly for eight years.

On Sunday, FIFA cleared Balogun to play on Monday. The last, and only, time a red card went unpunished before was in 1962.

The suspension of the suspension has created an international outcry although, as the Associated Press pointed out, this is only the latest step in a pattern in which Infantino appears to have been interfering with the independence of FIFA’s judicial and disciplinary bodies.

The Belgian soccer federation is challenging the ruling. “Regardless of the sporting outcome of the match,” it said, it was “deeply concerned by the way these events have unfolded and will continue, in the hours, days and months ahead, to pursue every available avenue to uphold the fundamental principles of ethics, sporting fairness and the interests of football as a whole.”

The Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) has called the decision “incomprehensible and unjustifiable.” “When the certainty of rules is no longer guaranteed by its guardians, the integrity of the game is at stake and the credibility of a competition is undermined,” it said. “Football is the most loved sport in the world because it is a beautiful game and is trusted because it is played everywhere with the same laws.”

But a world in which playing fields are level is not the world Trump wants. He wants one in which people in power can ignore the rule of law for their own ends.

Today, at the White House, he told reporters: “So I saw the play. And I’m a person that loves sports and was a good athlete. And I understand sports really well. Really well. And that wasn’t a foul. That wasn’t even an infraction. That was two guys running full speed that happened to crash into each other…. No, these were two great athletes that got tangled up, and this referee, who— is a little bit suspect— if you check his, if you check his past.”

“[Balogun] didn’t do anything wrong, and he’s our best player or one of our best players, a very— vital player, and he gave him a red card. I didn’t know what that meant. I didn’t think it meant much. Then I started hearing that that means he can’t play in the next game, at least in the next game. I said, Boy, that’s a big— You know, if it happened to another player, it would have been unfair, but when they take your best player or just about, they have some great players, but, and they say, you can’t play. That’s very unfair. That’s, you know, it’s one thing to penalize somebody for the game. But how do you penalize them for a game that hasn’t been played yet? is very unfair. You can’t do that. So, yes, I asked for a review by FIFA.

“I spoke to a man who’s highly respected, and, by the way, whose level of respect has gone up tenfold, and he was good before this started. But, you know, he really pushed it in this country.” And then, Trump was back to his usual grievances. “I’m the one that got them to do it. It was not Biden. Biden was asleep. I got him to do it. In fact, it was very sad because I got him to do it. And if the progression was normal, I would have been retired. Now, the Democrats are saying, Man, we should have just let him have his way, he would have. We would have had him gone, but I said, you know, the saddest thing is, I got the Olympics, and I got the World Cup.”

The president of the United States pressuring the president of FIFA to change the rules for his favored player perfectly represents the way Trump thinks about the rule of law in the United States. And the rejection of a level playing field shows in the way Trump and the Republicans have skewed the U.S economy so only their team can win.

Almost exactly a year ago, on July 4, 2025, Trump signed into law what he called the “One Big Beautiful Bill.” It passed both the House and the Senate without a single Democratic vote, making it a signature piece of legislation for Trump and his party. As Shannon Pettypiece and Mike Hixenbaugh of NBC News reported on July 1, there was a “seismic shift” at the heart of the new law: it extended about $4.5 trillion in tax cuts to corporations and wealthy Americans over ten years while cutting about $1.1 trillion from healthcare and food assistance programs that serve poor and working-class Americans. It also adds about $4.7 trillion to the national debt over the next ten years.

Public policy scholar Chris Howard noted that the law so dramatically rolls back the modern government constructed during and after the Depression and World War II, from 1933 to 1981, that it amounts to “Robin Hood in reverse.” “It deliberately targets some of the most vulnerable members of society,” he told Pettypiece and Hixenbaugh, “while providing huge windfalls to the richest individuals and to big business.”

And yet in 2026, Trump has taken to saying that those Americans calling for the government to maintain the rule of law to make sure the economic playing field is level, rather than working for corporations and the wealthy, are “communists.”

So he is looking to put a thumb on the scale of the midterm elections as he did in the FIFA match and the economy. Trump is demanding that Congress pass the so-called SAVE America Act, a massive voter suppression bill. Yesterday House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) told the Fox News Channel that he will try to get Congress to pass the measure by using the budget reconciliation process. Since such a process cannot be filibustered, Republicans might be able to pass it despite Democratic opposition.

Trump has repeatedly insisted that if the Republicans pass the measure, they won’t lose another election for a hundred years.

“The game tonight’s going to be amazing,” Trump said today about tonight’s match. “We’re going to have a full team and Belgium is going to have a full team. And you know what? If they beat us, then they can be really proud. The other way, if they beat us, we’ll say it was— I say it was rigged just like the election was rigged in 2020.”

Tonight, Belgium defeated the USA 4–1 in the World Cup match played in Seattle.

-------------------

Yep, I added red type to the relevant part. And I left out the part of her history lesson, though Richardson is a great historian. And Richardson's note on the passage of the "One Big Beautiful Bill" last year by the Repuglicans gives total evidence about the fiction represented by the politicized Social Security letter I talked about yesterday.

-------------

Gavin Newsome (on FaceBook) tongue in cheek...

They've politicized Social Security

 Last week I received a rare letter from the Social Security Administration.

From the same agency which I entrust my life's savings from years of working and sending money to be refunded when I retire...

Photo of the email as received, and I copied the text directly from the email with added red type for the political campaign messages.

This weekend, America celebrates its 250^th birthday. For over 90 of those years, Social Security has provided financial freedom for America's seniors. President Donald J. Trump and the Trump Administration are not only protecting Social Security, but we are providing meaningful and immediate relief to older Americans who have spent decades contributing to our nation's economy.

Just last year, on July 4, 2025, President Trump signed into law the Working Families Tax Cuts Act. This historic legislation included a tax cut that allows Americans 65 and older to keep more of their hard-earned Social Security benefits. Thanks to President Trump, over 35 million American seniors received an average of $7,500 in relief this tax season.

If you did not take advantage of the President's signature tax cut for seniors, I encourage you to review eligibility requirements through the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) website for next year's tax filing season.

Under the leadership of President Trump, we are protecting and strengthening Social Security while providing world-class customer service:

• In SSA field offices, we've reduced wait times by 30 percent;

• On the phone, we've answered calls 75 percent faster;

• We're meeting the needs of seniors in the digital age with 24/7 access to online my Social Security accounts;

• We've increased the number of personal my Social Security accounts to over 100 million users and have processed over 100 million more transactions this year;

• For disability claimants, we have reduced processing times by 25 percent; and

• Our efforts to prioritize efficiency, streamline our processes, and decrease wait times are saving Americans time while delivering the highest quality service.

Put simply, America's seniors are winning! I'm honored to be in your service.

Happy 250^th birthday, America!

Frank J. Bisignano
Commissioner
Social Security Administration

------------------------------------------

The Red Ink is mine, just in case you miss the political campaign statements, many of which are borderline false. (I will leave it to others to give corrections.)

This is crass campaigning on a legitimate government business agency. Isn't that illegal? Would the IRS allow it? Or the Veterans Bureau? 

I'm just sick! 

And angry!

And something beautiful to just show that the universe does offer beauty still!

Colorado columbine, aquilegia caerulea taken by a very good photographer.

living at 72 in 2015

If you don't have a fixed income... you don't need to read any further...you still have options.
If you don't have Medicare...skip this.

For those of us elders who have a small amount tucked away, but depend upon our Social Security checks (another kind of savings account which represents our earnings before we retired) then this might be your kind of headache.

I looked on line at the options for Medicare this coming year.  In my county, in my state (North Carolina) I will have to pay a new monthly premium.  Can't find a single private company which will honor the previous policy of taking the amount set aside for Medicare from my monthly Social Security check ($104.90/month). For the past seven years since I retired, Medicare has been covered completely by my SS.  Now all the policies will cost more than that figure.

So I called in a panic to the SHIP people, a state agency which helps elders for their insurance needs.  They had a cancellation for an appointment that very day, if I could drive the 30 miles to it.  I agreed.

But the woman wasn't able to answer my needs.

I don't have any increase in income.  But now I have an increase in expenses.

It's not much.  But when you count pennies it does represent several thousand.

The woman from SHIP was sorry she couldn't help.  She even called me at home later to say she had some other ideas, to call the Social Security people and ask for help.

So last night I did.  And waited for a live person for 20 minutes after the first 5 minutes of menu choices pre-recorded.  Then I hung up and again went through the menu until I got to the option of "we'll call you in 15 minutes."  I left my name and number, and someone did call.

Incidentally, the first thing the recording says is that Social Security has been increased for COLA (some cost of living formula) by 1.7% in 2015.  Thanks to our government.

And the SS woman was nice, but had no answers for my dilemma, and gave me back the SHIP phone number, and said there is an application which I can fill out if I already am purchasing a Supplement through Medicare.  But I won't find out if I'm approved for this until
1.) after the deadline date to sign up for Medicare
2.) 2 weeks to 30 days

So I didn't go to bed thinking things had been solved.

I have talked (before retiring 7 years ago) to a Social Worker about some of these problems.  That person had gone to college, passed a licensing test, and kept current on the issues of elders who lived on fixed incomes, had chronic medical conditions needing frequent treatment by doctors, and needed ongoing daily medications.

I am not so knowledgeable.  I don't have access to a Social Worker, but that is the person I most need at this moment.  From having gone to college many years ago, I was able to wade through the Medicare DOT gov site and learned more than I probably needed to know about things I didn't need to know at all.

I have called my primary doctor as well as asked about specialist coverage if I don't have an Advantage Plan, or Supplement Plan...which are donkeys and horses in Medicare-speak.  There are so many choices of each it's blinding...but none without monthly premiums.

I have a current plan that doesn't  cover my physical therapy treatment for a torn rotator cuff for less than the cost of a specialist, so I haven't received the course of treatment I needed.  I thought I might be able to look at several plans and find the one that offers lessor cost of physical therapy.  Nah.  That's not available.  There's no list of costs of services, just a generic list of "what an average elder person would need to spend" for everything.  What?

What kind of sales system do these private insurance companies offer?  You can't purchase things blind.  But that's exactly what this system seems to me.

I'm assuming Social Workers know that company "Humana" for instance has offered $25 physical therapy under such and such a plan, and company "United Healthcare" offers the same for $50 per visit.  Why can't they tell me that?

In the meantime, I refuse to sign up for any of them.  On Sunday night, when the deadline looms, I'll sign up for something I'm sure.  Today is the last business day to contact all those 800 numbers, so I'll try to get some answers on "assistance programs."  Not holding my breath however.

What happened to MY earnings in SS?

Well the "sequestration silliness" may just impact me, as so many "budget cuts" seem to land on the shoulders of those who can so valiantly not hold them up.

As Ronnie Bennett says on her blog this morning...and as is true all mornings...

"Again, for the zillionth time, Social Security is a closed system. It does not contribute a penny to the deficit. Beneficiaries paid into this program all their working lives and to cut benefits is stealing money from old people who have no means to make up the difference."

 The above quote was her comment in answer to ...

"While Obama turned up pressure on Congress yesterday to act before the 1 March deadline, he repeated what has become his let-elders-pay-for-the-deficit mantra, saying that he has

”...laid out specific reforms to our entitlement programs”

By which we have come to understand that he means enacting the chained CPI for calculating cost-of-living increases to Social Security."

 Oh just read her blog here!

I just want to shout.  I do get so anxious about all this.

Here's a picture of your Mom.
(Imagine a skillet with a fried egg in it)

Here's your Mom with her life savings and her contributions to Social Security being sucked away by a national deficit (to which she contributed HOW?)
(Imagine dumping the egg into a huge dumpster)

Now here's your Mom having used up her life savings and no longer getting enough back from her own Social Security to live on.
(Imagine your own Mom in 10-year-old clothes, homeless, outside a mansion begging, while the owners of the mansion are behind a locked gate (of course) with lots of the latest toys...but not having to pay taxes on their earnings, which of course multiply by the thousandfold because having money is the way to earn money.)

And here's the congress of the United States smiling at having cut a deficit on the backs of their mothers.
(Imagine a lot of mothers picking up those skillets and wielding them at their sons)

Get the picture?  It's really going to be ugly.

I believe our congress is ruled by the Marie Antoinette mentality.  "Let them eat cake." is the best they can understand as the way to care for others.