US state department says World Cup fans ‘want to see' Donald Trump's travel ban
A US state department spokesperson on Thursday claimed that attendees of the upcoming World Cup and Olympics should support the restrictions on travel from 19 countries ordered by Donald Trump.
On Wednesday evening, the US president signed a sweeping order banning travel from 12 countries and restricting travel from seven others, reviving and expanding a policy from his first term.
'I think people from around the world, and Americans going to these events, would want to see actions like this,' said US state department spokesperson Tommy Pigott at a press briefing on Thursday afternoon. 'This is part of what it means to host an event. We take security concerns extremely seriously, we want people to be able to go to the World Cup and do so safely.'
The order claims at various points that the restrictions are a response to supposed deficiencies in each country's own vetting procedures. Pressed on Thursday on what relevance other country's procedures had on the US's ability to vet immigrants themselves, Pigott declined to elaborate.
Nationals of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen will be 'fully' restricted from entering the US, according to Wednesday's proclamation. Meanwhile, the entry of nationals of Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela will be partly restricted. The order is set to go into effect on 9 June.
The order does contain an exception for 'any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, travelling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the secretary of state.' However, that exception does not explicitly cover a number of specific cases or situations that will be relevant for players from affected countries who intend to play in the United States.
First, the exception does not specify whether the 'World Cup' referred to in the order includes the Club World Cup, which starts this month and is being hosted by the US. Asked by the Guardian whether the Club World Cup – in which a number of players from the banned countries are due to play – was included in the exception, a state department spokesperson declined to comment other than to say they would not get into hypotheticals or specific cases.
Fifa also declined to comment to the Guardian when asked about this distinction and whether the organization was involved in lobbying Trump to carve out this exception as part of the travel ban.
The definition of 'major event' is also left open to interpretation, making it unclear whether or not this summer's Gold Cup qualifies. That tournament, the regional soccer championship for North and Central America and the Caribbean will feature Haiti, who are scheduled to play the United States in Austin, Texas on 19 June in addition to group games in San Diego, California and Arlington, Texas.
A spokesperson for Concacaf, the confederation that oversees the Gold Cup, did not respond to a request for comment. The state department declined to comment.
Sign up to Soccer with Jonathan Wilson
Jonathan Wilson brings expert analysis on the biggest stories from European soccer
after newsletter promotion
The order also lays out a number of exceptions regarding current visa holders, providing a list of visa types for which holders will not be subject to travel restrictions. The P-1 visa most often issued to professional soccer players in MLS, the NWSL and other leagues is not listed among those who qualify for the exception, but specific type of banned visas are specified for individual countries in the order.
Venezuela, for example, has various types of B, F, M and J visas that are banned under the order. That means that the order does not impact P-1 visas issued to nationals of Venezuela. MLS currently has three players on international duty with Venezuela. One, the San Jose Earthquakes' Josef Martínez, became a US citizen last year. The other two, Inter Miami's Telasco Segovia and LAFC's David Martínez, are recent arrivals to MLS and do not yet have permanent residency. Venezuela are set to play a World Cup qualifier on Thursday night against Bolivia, and are scheduled for another at Uruguay on Tuesday 10 June – one day after the ban is set to be enforced.
An MLS spokesperson declined to elaborate when asked if there were concerns about the Venezuelan players' immigration status. Asked on Thursday if the travel ban could impact current US visa holders from these countries, Pigott said that the exceptions will apply on a 'case-by-case basis.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Barron Trump's best friend claims he got ICE to detain world's biggest TikTok star Khaby Lame
One of Barron Trump's supposed best friends has claimed he's responsible for getting the world's biggest TikTok star deported out of the United States. Bo Loudon, a Gen Z MAGA influencer who's previously been pictured with Barron and Donald Trump, said he reported Khaby Lame to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Loudon's first post on X came June 6 when he wrote that Lame is an 'illegal alien ' in all caps before proclaiming that he has 'been working with the patriots at President Trump's DHS' to deport the Senegal-born influencer. ICE already confirmed Lame was detained at Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas on June 6, the same day Loudon made his supposed involvement public. Lame, who has over 162 million TikTok followers, overstayed his visa after entering the country on April 30, according to an ICE spokesperson. He was granted 'voluntary departure', a bureaucratic euphemism for being kicked out. 'Serigne Khabane Lame, 25, a citizen of Italy, was detained… for immigration violations,' the spokesperson confirmed in a statement. 'Lame was granted voluntary departure… and has since departed the US.' Loudon, 18, claimed that Lame was detained at Henderson Detention Center, southeast of Las Vegas proper, though its unclear how long he may have been in custody before leaving. ICE has not confirmed whether Loudon was involved in reporting Lame to authorities. has approached immigration officials for comment but did not immediately respond. Loudon has continued to celebrate his alleged role in the TikToker's removal. He made a post Wednesday afternoon denouncing various media outlets' coverage of this incident, who reportedly called him a 'rat' and a 'rat extraordinaire'. 'Why? Because I helped President Trump's DHS deport TikTok's biggest star, Khaby Lame, for being in the U.S. illegally,' he added. 'I wish Khaby well and hope he returns as a LAW-ABIDING citizen.' Loudon also did an interview with Dylan Page, another popular TikToker who has been the 'News Daddy.' In that sit-down, Loudon said he became aware of Lame's immigration status because 'he had worked with a few of my friends and business partners' who said his visa expired years ago. 'I called some people in the administration and they said "we're gonna get on this right quick,"' Loudon said. Lame is best known known for his dead-pan skits reacting to other content on the social media site. Loudon admitted that he doesn't watch much of Lame's content but said Lame has posted videos expressing a 'hatred' for Trump. 'I'm sure he hates him much more now, which is why I posted "far-left" TikToker,' he said. Lame has not commented on his detainment or his removal from the US and has continued to post videos as if nothing happened. As recently as May 5, Lame attended the Met Gala in New York City, where he wore a three piece suit with well over a dozen timepieces attached to his vest. Loudon, from Palm Beach, Florida, is the son of Dr. Gina Loudon, a conservative pundit and former co-chair of Women for Trump in 2020. His father, John Loudon, was a Republican Missouri state senator until 2008. Loudon and Barron Trump were instrumental convincing Donald Trump that it was a strategic advantage to appear on various podcasts popular with young me, including Adin Ross' show.
Reuters
23 minutes ago
- Reuters
China-US trade deal kicks the rare earths can down the road
LAUNCESTON, Australia, June 12 (Reuters) - The tentative deal between the United States and China may represent a retreat from the worst-case scenario of a total collapse of trade between the world's two biggest economies, but it creates more problems than it solves. President Donald Trump touted the agreement, which is still subject to final approvals on both sides, as a "great deal" that will be good for both countries. "We have everything we need, and we're going to do very well with it. And hopefully they are too," Trump told reporters prior to attending a performance on Wednesday evening at Washington's Kennedy Center. While not all the details are known, what has been revealed shows a deal that will probably hurt both economies, and not solve some of the pressing issues, such as China's dominance of the rare earths supply chain. The United States will impose tariffs of 55% on imports from China, while China can levy 10% on its purchases from the United States. This still represents a sharp increase in tariffs from the 25% on imports from China that was in place when Trump returned to the White House in late January. Tariffs at such a level are likely high enough to cause trade to shrink while boosting inflation in the United States, and lowering economic growth in both countries. If Beijing does keep 10% tariffs on imports of U.S. energy commodities, these will be high enough to ensure that virtually no U.S. crude oil, coal or liquefied natural gas enters China, eliminating one of the few products that China is able to buy in large quantities from the United States. It's also questionable whether the tariffs will be enough to prompt more manufacturing in the United States, or whether they will simply cause some production to shift from China to countries with lower import duties. Trump did single out rare earths when talking up the trade deal, saying China will provide the metals that are found in a wide range of electronics and vehicles "up front". But the deal does little to solve the underlying problem with rare earths, magnets and other refined metals such as lithium and cobalt, which are dominated by Chinese supply chains. At best, the agreement this week is a kick the can down the road type of deal, insofar as it prevents an immediate crisis in manufacturing in the United States, but leaves open the possibility that Beijing will once again threaten supplies if there are problems between the two sides in the future. China controls 85% of global rare earths refining, a situation that has hitherto largely benefited Western companies as they have been able to source the metals at prices far lower than what they would have had to pay had they tried to mine and process the elements by themselves. Rare earths are an example of the wider problem with so-called critical minerals. It's all very well to designate a mineral as critical, but if you don't actually do anything to secure a supply chain, then you really have to question just how critical the mineral is. Rare earths aren't really that rare, although finding economic deposits is challenging. It's the same for lithium, copper, cobalt, tungsten and a range of other metals that many governments designate as critical. But developing supply chains for these minerals and refined metals outside of China is costly, and so far Western countries and companies have been unwilling to commit funds. Companies won't develop new mines and processing plants if they have to compete with China at market prices, as very few projects would be economic. Governments have been sluggish in developing policies that would support new supply chains, such as guaranteeing offtake at prices high enough to justify investment, or by providing loans or other incentives. This means that the world remains beholden to China for these metals, and is likely to remain so until governments start to act rather than just talk. It's also worth noting that China will have learned from its latest talks with the Trump administration. As Trump himself may have put it, the United States doesn't hold all the cards, with Beijing having a few aces up its sleeve as well. The danger is always in overplaying one's hand. If Beijing keeps using rare earths as a trump card, it runs the risk that the West will cough up the cash to build its own supply chain. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X, opens new tab. The views expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.
NBC News
23 minutes ago
- NBC News
Israel considering military strike on Iran, sources say
Israel is considering taking military action against Iran — most likely without U.S. support — in the coming days, even as President Donald Trump is in advanced discussions with Tehran about a diplomatic deal to curtail its nuclear program, according to five people with knowledge of the situation. Israel has become more serious about a unilateral strike on Iran as the negotiations between the U.S. and Iran appear closer to a preliminary or framework agreement that includes provisions about uranium enrichment that Israel views as unacceptable. A unilateral strike or action by Israel against Iran would be a dramatic break with the Trump administration, which has argued against such a step. The renewed threat of an Israeli strike comes as the Trump administration is awaiting a response from Iran on a proposed framework of a nuclear deal, and as the president has publicly said Tehran has become more hardline in its negotiations. The notion of a new front in a simmering conflict has prompted the Trump administration to order all embassies within striking distance of Iranian missiles, aircraft and other assets (including missions in the Middle East, Northern Africa, and Eastern Europe) to send cables with assessments about danger and about measures to mitigate risks to Americans and U.S. infrastructure, according to two sources familiar. U.S. and other officials are on alert awaiting the possibility of Israel striking Iran, the officials said. The White House has not briefed senior lawmakers on the issue, according to that aide and a U.S. official. One major concern is Iran retaliating against U.S. personnel or assets in the region for any action. Israel, which relies on intelligence or other direct and logistical assistance from the U.S., may be in a position to take unilateral action against Tehran, the source familiar said. The sources familiar and officials were not aware of any planned U.S. involvement in the possible action. The U.S. could support with aerial re-fueling or intelligence sharing rather than kinetic support but the sources and officials were not aware of plans for that either at this point. U.S. officials have announced that the voluntary departure of non-essential employees from the region. And the Pentagon announced the voluntary departure of military families from locations all across the U.S. Central Command area of operations. CENTCOM Commander General Erik Kurilla was due to testify on the Hill on Thursday, but the hearing was postponed late Wednesday without explanation. A source familiar said Kurilla had to focus on this unfolding situation. Another possible factor: Iran is rebuilding its strategic air defenses, and manned strikes will soon be exponentially more dangerous for Israeli pilots. In October, Israel damaged nearly every one of Iran's strategic air defense systems (mainly S-300s) but much of the damage was to the radars or other parts that can be rebuilt. It's possible Israel's window for manned strikes, without being threatened by Iran's coordinated strategic air defenses, is closing. While Israel would most likely prefer U.S. military and intelligence support for strikes — especially against Iranian nuclear facilities — they showed in October that they can do a lot alone. Michael Knights of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the evacuation of non-essential staff at the U.S. embassy in Iraq will send a message to Tehran that Trump will not necessarily hold Israel back from launching a threatened attack on Iran. 'It's about trying to get Iran to respect the president's wishes,' Knights said. Iran has failed to meet a two-month deadline set by Trump to reach an agreement on the country's nuclear activities, and the president is frustrated, he said. Both Knights and a source with knowledge of the matter said it was unclear if Israel would undertake a limited military strike now or wait until nuclear negotiations played out further. Trump has expressed growing frustration over Iran's stance at recent indirect talks, portraying Tehran as inflexible and slow moving. 'They're just asking for things that you can't do. They don't want to give up what they have to give up,' Trump told reporters on Monday. 'They seek enrichment. We can't have enrichment.'
