Trump kept FIFA Club World Cup trophy for himself - leaving champions Chelsea to lift a replica
Before the showpiece game at MetLife Stadium, New Jersey, Trump told broadcaster DAZN that he was gifted the trophy, and that it currently sits in the Oval Office.
Advertisement
FIFA President Gianni Infantino visited the White House, along with the trophy, in March.
'They said, 'Could you hold this trophy for a little while?' We put it in the Oval Office,' Trump said. 'And then I said, 'When are you going to pick up the trophy?' He says, 'We're never going to pick it up. You can have it forever in the Oval Office. We're making a new one.''
'And they actually made a new one. So that was quite exciting…It's in the Oval right now,' he added.
This meant that, despite upsetting the odds with their triumph over European champions Paris Saint-Germain, Chelsea had to make do with the replica trophy.
President Donald Trump stands on stage as Chelsea celebrates their Club World Cup victory (AP)
President Donald Trump stands on stage as Chelsea celebrates their Club World Cup victory (AP)
Advertisement
Trump also quipped he 'could' write an executive order changing the name of 'soccer' to 'football.'
'They would call it football, but I guess we call it soccer,' Trump said, referring to the sport's name throughout much of the world.
The interviewer asked: 'What if we make an executive order that we can only say football?'
'I think we could do that,' he added. 'I think I could do that.'
Trump confirmed that the original trophy is still sitting in the Oval Office, with champions Chelsea lifting a replica. (Getty Images)
Trump confirmed that the original trophy is still sitting in the Oval Office, with champions Chelsea lifting a replica. (Getty Images)
Trump grabbed headlines throughout Sunday's final. He was jeered when he appeared on the stadium's screens alongside First Lady Melania Trump, and again when he walked onto the pitch to present medals to the players with Infantino, who confirmed last week that FIFA opened a new office in New York City's Trump Tower.
Advertisement
More confusion was sparked online when the president remained with the Chelsea players on stage as they celebrated, having already handed captain Reece James the trophy.
After the match, players from the English Premier League club admitted they didn't expect the president to stay with them.
'I knew he was going to be here but I didn't know he was going to be on the stand when we lifted the trophy. I was a bit confused, yes,' Cole Palmer, who scored twice in the game, told PA Media.
'They told me that he was going to present the trophy and then exit the stage, and I thought that he was going to exit the stage, but he wanted to stay,' captain James added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Nvidia CEO downplays role in lifting US ban on chip sales to China
BEIJING (AP) — The head of Nvidia downplayed his role in getting the U.S. government to lift a ban on selling an advanced computer chip in China and said it will take time to ramp up production once orders for the AI-processor come in. CEO Jensen Huang, speaking Wednesday in the Chinese capital Beijing, was upbeat about the prospects for the H20 chip, which was designed to meet U.S. restrictions on technology exports to China but nonetheless blocked in April. He met U.S. President Donald Trump before his trip and his company announced this week it had received assurances that sales to China would be approved. 'I don't think I changed his mind,' Huang told a cluster of journalists, many of whom asked for his autograph or to take selfies with him. A carefully organized press conference at a luxury hotel descended into a crowd scene when Huang arrived in his trademark leather jacket and started taking questions randomly in his characteristic casual style. Export controls and tariffs were something companies must adapt to in a world he said was reconfiguring itself. He described his role as informing governments in the U.S. and elsewhere of the nature and unintended consequences of their policies. The decision to lift the ban on the H20 chip was entirely in the hands of the American and Chinese governments and whatever trade talks they had, he said. 'We can only influence them, inform them, do our best to provide them with facts,' Huang said. 'And then beyond that is out of our control.' Nvidia said in April that sales restrictions on its chip in China on national security grounds would cost the company $5.5 billion. The White House also blocked a chip from Advanced Micro Devices. Both companies say the Commerce Department is now moving forward with license applications to export them to China. Huang said his company would likely be able to recover some of its losses but it's unclear how much. That will depend on how many H20 orders are received and how quickly Nvidia can meet the demand. 'I think that H20 is going to be very successful here,' he said, noting the chip's memory bandwidth makes it a good fit for the AI models being developed by Chinese companies such as DeepSeek and Alibaba. Huang also touted the release of a new RTX Pro graphics chip that he said would power the development of humanoid robots. He described robotic systems with teams of robots working alongside people as the next wave in AI. 'Because there's so much robotics innovation going on and so much smart factory work being done here and the supply chain is so vast, RTX Pro is perfect,' he said. Ken Moritsugu, The Associated Press
Associated Press
19 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Live updates: Congress debates $9 billion cuts on foreign aid and public media
Senate Republicans on Tuesday advanced President Donald Trump's request to cancel some $9 billion in previously approved spending, overcoming concerns from some lawmakers about what the rescissions could mean for impoverished people around the globe and for public radio and television stations in their home states. The Senate vote was 50-50, with Vice President JD Vance breaking the tie. A final vote in the Senate could occur as early as today. The bill would then return to the House for another vote before it would go to Trump's desk for his signature before a Friday deadline. Republicans winnowed down the president's request by taking out his proposed $400 million cut to a program known as PEPFAR. That change increased the prospects for the bill's passage. The politically popular program is credited with saving millions of lives since its creation under then-President George W. Bush to combat HIV/AIDS. The president is also looking to claw back money for foreign aid programs targeted by his Department of Government Efficiency and for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Update: Date: 2025-07-16 12:21:59 Title: Some Republicans remain skeptical of the rescissions package Content: Maine Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said she was particularly concerned about a lack of specifics from the White House. 'Nobody really knows what program reductions are in it,' Collins said. 'That isn't because we haven't had time to review the bill. Instead, the problem is that OMB has never provided the details that would normally be part of this process.' Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said she didn't want the Senate to be going through numerous rounds of rescissions. 'We are lawmakers. We should be legislating,' Murkowski said. 'What we're getting now is a direction from the White House and being told: 'This is the priority and we want you to execute on it. We'll be back with you with another round.' I don't accept that.' Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Collins and Murkowski joined with Democrats in voting against the Senate taking up the measure, but the large majority of Republicans were supportive of Trump's request. Update: Date: 2025-07-16 12:06:00 Title: Ask AP reporters a question Content: Update: Date: 2025-07-16 12:02:10 Title: Catch up on the latest headlines Content: AP Morning Wire curates the most important stories and sends them straight to your inbox. Sign up for the free newsletter here.
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
How an email error sparked a secret scramble to bring Afghans to Britain
LONDON (AP) — British governments past and present face allegations of avoiding scrutiny and undermining democracy after the revelation that thousands of Afghans have been resettled in the U.K under a program that was hidden from the media, the public and lawmakers in Parliament. Key information was also kept from the Afghans themselves, who had assisted U.K. forces and whose personal details had been disclosed in a huge data leak. Many plan to sue the British government for putting them in danger from the Taliban. Some are left in Afghanistan as the current British government says the resettlement program will end. Here's what happened in an extraordinary chain of events. An email error with huge consequences The saga was triggered by the chaotic Western exit from Afghanistan in August 2021 as the Taliban, ousted from power 20 years earlier, swept across the country, seized Kabul and reimposed their strict version of Islamic law. Afghans who had worked with Western forces — as fixers, translators and in other roles — or who had served in the internationally backed Afghan army were at risk of retribution. Britain set up a program, known as the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy, or ARAP, to bring some to the U.K. In February 2022, a defense official emailed a spreadsheet containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 ARAP applicants to someone outside the Ministry of Defense. The government says the individual thought they were sending a list of about 150 names, not the whole set. The British government only became aware of the leak when a portion of the data was posted on Facebook 18 months later by someone who threatened to publish the whole list. The government sought secrecy The leak sparked alarm among British officials who feared as many as 100,000 people were in danger when family numbers of the named individuals were added. The then-Conservative government sought a court order barring publication of the list. A judge granted a sweeping order known as a super injunction, which barred anyone from revealing not only information about the leak but the existence of the injunction itself. Super injunctions are relatively rare and their use is controversial. Most of the handful of cases in which they have come to light involved celebrities trying to prevent disclosures about their private lives. This is the first known case of a super injunction being granted to the government. Former Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said Wednesday that he sought the legal order to gain 'time and space to deal with this leak, find out whether the Taliban had it' and protect those at risk. Wallace said he asked for an ordinary injunction — not a super injunction — for a period of four months. The gag order remained in place for almost two years. A secret program sparked a legal battle The government began bringing to Britain the Afghans on the leaked list who were judged to be most at risk. To date, some 4,500 people — 900 applicants and approximately 3,600 family members — have been brought to Britain under the program. About 6,900 people are expected to be relocated by the time it closes, at a cost of 850 million pounds ($1.1 billion). In all, about 36,000 Afghans have been resettled in the U.K. since 2021. Meanwhile, several news organizations had learned of the leaked list but were barred from publishing stories about it. They challenged the super injunction in court, and a judge ordered it lifted in May 2024 — but it remained in place after the government appealed. The government finally came clean Britain held an election in July 2024 that brought the center-left Labour Party to power. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his Cabinet learned of the injunction soon after taking office and grappled with how to proceed. In January, the government ordered a review by a former senior civil servant. They found little evidence that the leaked data would expose Afghans to a greater risk of retribution from the Taliban. The review said the Taliban had other sources of information on those who had worked with the previous Afghan government and international forces and is more concerned with current threats to its authority. Given those findings, the government dropped its support for the super injunction. The injunction was lifted in court Tuesday, and minutes later Defense Secretary John Healey stood in the House of Commons to make the saga public for the first time. Many questions remain unanswered Healey said the secret settlement route was being closed, but acknowledged Wednesday that 'the story is just beginning,' and many questions remain unanswered. Immigration critics including Reform UK leader Nigel Farage are demanding to know what screening was done on the people who came under the secret program. Lawyers for Afghans on the leaked list want to know why the information was kept from them. Adnan Malik, head of data privacy at U.K. legal firm Barings Law, said he was assembling a class-action lawsuit by hundreds of former translators, soldiers and others. Lawmakers and free speech advocates say the use of a super injunction is deeply worrying. They ask how Parliament and the media can hold the government to account if there is such stringent secrecy. Judge Martin Chamberlain, who ruled that the injunction should be lifted, said Tuesday at the High Court that the super injunction 'had the effect of completely shutting down the ordinary mechanisms of accountability.' Healey acknowledged that 'you cannot have democracy with super injunctions in place,' and said the government had acted as quickly and safely as it could. 'Accountability starts now,' he told the BBC.
