Philipp Schmidli/Getty

Two days before FIFA’s presidential elections, its appeals committee decides to go easy on Blatter.

As the world soccer organization prepares to usher in a new era of transparency and reform, the committee decided to reduce outgoing Blatter and UEFA President Michel Platini’s eight-year bans from the sport by two years—because of their “services to football.” The two were banned in December over a $2 million payment Blatter made to Platini in 2011. This still means that neither Blatter nor Platini, who have both vehemently protested their innocence, can stand for election on Friday, but it is unwelcome news for FIFA as it tries to move forward with new leadership.

January 24, 2017

Alex Wong/Getty Images

David Brooks thinks Hamilton was better than the Women’s March.

In his column in the Times today, Brooks argues that the Women’s March was bad, actually, because it didn’t work towards the goal of “building a nation that balances the dynamism of capitalism with biblical morality.” It’s hard to imagine a more out-of-touch prescription for the ails of 2017.

More than three million people showed up at women’s marches around the world. While the impact of such demonstrations can be debated, Brooks seems more intent on depicting these protests as a primal scream of identity politics. His first criticism is that, “All the big things that were once taken for granted are now under assault: globalization, capitalism, adherence to the Constitution, the American-led global order. If you’re not engaging these issues first, you’re not going to be in the main arena of national life.” As anyone who attended the marches knows, protesters were protesting Donald Trump in toto: the threat he represents to women, yes, but also to rule of law, global stability, civil rights, the works.

He argues that the protests were devoted to issues of importance to “university towns and coastal cities,” despite the fact that more than 500 cities throughout the country held marches. Lost in the cloud of his frowny moralizing , Brooks can’t see that he may be the one falling outside of the “main arena of national life.”

Brooks himself leans on elite works, like Hamilton and Columbia professor Mark Lilla’s essay in the Times excoriating “identity liberalism,” a piece that has been criticized for its revisionist history. Brooks states that “Times readers loved that piece and it vaulted to the top of the most-read charts,” a measure of elite accomplishment if there ever was one. But having a most-read piece does not mean that it was a well-loved piece or even a coherent piece. David Brooks should know that better than anyone.

Ben Carson finally has something to do with his hands again.

On Tuesday Carson woke up from a nap and was notified that he had been officially appointed to lead HUD. Carson’s entry into the Trump cabinet was particularly surprising given their tumultuous history together. When Carson briefly caught up to Trump in the polls in November of 2015, Trump compared him to a pedophile. Referring to Carson’s (possibly fabricated) history of violent outbursts as a young teen, which he recounts in his memoir Gifted Hands, Trump said, “It’s in the book that he’s got a pathological temper. That’s a big problem because you don’t cure that … as an example: child molesting. You don’t cure these people. You don’t cure a child molester. There’s no cure for it. Pathological: there’s no cure for that.” Carson repaid the favor by being Trump’s worst surrogate.

In his book One Nation, Carson—who was a pediatric neurosurgeon—wrote: “A job as a school bus driver taught me to be extremely cautious around small schoolchildren.” Just think how much he’ll learn as secretary of HUD!


Keep delegitimizing Donald Trump, it’s working.

Trump has been president for five days now, but he’s still stuck in an election that ended three months ago. On Monday night, he met with members of Congress and once again thought it fit to re-litigate an election he lost by nearly three million votes. Here’s The Washington Post on the meeting:

Days after being sworn in, President Trump insisted to congressional leaders invited to a reception at the White House that he would have won the popular vote had it not been for millions of illegal votes, according to people familiar with the meeting...

Two people familiar with the meeting said Trump spent about 10 minutes at the start of the bipartisan gathering rehashing the campaign. He also told them that between 3 million and 5 million illegal votes caused him to lose the popular vote.

There is no evidence to support Trump’s claim that millions voted illegally—there isn’t even evidence to support a claim that hundreds voted illegally. Recounts in key states have shown no statistically significant evidence of voter fraud.

Trump is fixated on the result of the election because he seems to be obsessed with his own legitimacy as president. This fixation not only further damages his presidency by showcasing Trump’s pettiness and narcissism, it also ties him up—it damages his political capital and distracts him from pushing his destructive policies. Obviously this won’t stop Trump from doing a lot of damage, but reminding the country—and Trump himself—of his historic unpopularity is still a winning political tactic. Let’s keep it up.

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Trump calls himself an “environmentalist,” while pledging to cut auto regulations and approving oil pipelines.

In a meeting with the CEOs of GM, Ford, and Fiat Chrysler this morning, Trump claimed, “I am to a very large extent an environmentalist, I believe in it.” This came almost immediately after he asserted that his administration would reduce “unnecessary regulations” for the auto industry.

Trump is also planning to sign executive orders this morning approving construction of both the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines, fulfilling promises he made during his campaign.

Both the pipeline approval and Trump’s anti-regulation stance are boons for big business. For a self-proclaimed environmentalist, it’s hard to imagine Trump doing more to damage the environment, in a single day no less. But hey, it’s still early.

Don Emmert/Getty

The Academy Awards announce which films will lose to La La Land.

Oscar nominations were released on Tuesday morning in a strange and often confusing pre-taped video that included a commercial for the Oscars, as if people watching Oscar nominations being read out were somehow on the fence about tuning in to the live broadcast. (That said, I did learn that Jimmy Kimmel is apparently hosting this year’s show.)

For the most part, the 2017 nominations are in stark contrast to the 2016 nominations, which were blindingly white. Fences, Hidden Figures, and Moonlight were each nominated for a host of awards, including Best Picture. Moonlight’s Barry Jenkins was nominated for Best Director; Fences’ Denzel Washington was nominated for Best Actor while Viola Davis was nominated for Supporting Actress, alongside Hidden Figures’s Octavia Spencer; and all three were nominated for Adapted Screenplay. Dev Patel, meanwhile, became only the third actor of Indian descent to be nominated for Best Actor for his performance in Lion.

There were some surprises, as there always are. Annette Bening was inexplicably not nominated for Best Actress for her performance in 20th Century Woman and Weiner was not nominated for Best Documentary. But the biggest surprise was that Mel Gibson, who has a long, long history of saying incredibly vile and racist things, was nominated for Best Director for Hacksaw Ridge. That film has been pushed as a comeback vehicle for some time and the Oscars love a comeback, but Gibson’s nomination threatens to overshadow the Awards themselves. Gibson has largely stayed quiet about his past—his apologies have not been very good—but he won’t be able to hide from the spotlight this time, especially given the wider political climate.

Of course, Gibson won’t win. The award for Best Director will almost certainly go to Moonlight’s Barry Jenkins—but only as a consolation prize. That’s because La La Land was nominated for 14 awards, tying Titanic and All About Eve for most ever, and it will most likely win a bunch of them, including Best Picture. The full list of nominees is here.

This post has been updated.

January 23, 2017

Donald Trump’s White House doesn’t get the concept of facts.

Sean Spicer, Donald Trump’s new press secretary, was mocked by pretty much everyone over the weekend for insisting that Trump’s inauguration boasted the “largest audience to ever witness an inauguration—period—both in person and around the globe.” While exact numbers are impossible to acquire, Trump’s inauguration was not the most viewed in person—it was dwarfed by Barack Obama’s inauguration in 2009, which is obvious when you look at at side-by-side pictures. D.C. public transit data also back up the claim that Obama’s inauguration was better attended: While 570,000 riders used the Metro system on Friday, Obama’s two inaugurations had 1.1 million and 782,000 trips, respectively. The Nielsen ratings for Trump’s inauguration were much smaller than those of Obama’s 2009 inauguration and Ronald Reagan’s 1981 inauguration. In other words, the claim simply isn’t credible.

On Monday, Spicer had his first official press briefing with the White House press corps. It was more cordial—Spicer shifted his tone from “barely restrained frothing” to “normal White House press secretary BS”—but he doubled down on his false claim, falling back on the Trump administration’s new endorsement of “alternative facts.”

Spicer asserted that “we have to be honest with the American people” but “sometimes we can disagree with the facts.” That is not, of course, how facts work.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Trump’s era of “monstrous and special” capitalism is upon us, just as the white working class wanted.

In a photo-op with business leaders at the White House Monday morning, President Donald Trump arbitrarily suggested his administration would “cut regulations by 75 percent, maybe more,” so that big companies can do whatever they want without considering externalities like environmental and employee safety.

“When you want to expand your plant, or when Mark wants to come in and build a big massive plant, or when Dell wants to come in and do something monstrous and special – you’re going to have your approvals really fast,” Trump said, referring to Mark Fields, CEO of Ford, who sat around the boardroom-style table in the Roosevelt Room.

Trump has a pretty limited vocabulary, which means now and again we’re treated to moments of accidental honesty.

Jim Watson/Getty

Rex Tillerson shows that Democrats need to stop putting faith in the GOP.

To block Donald Trump’s cabinet nominees, Democrats need the help of at least three Republicans. This has led Democrats to place their faith in a handful of hawkish Republicans—most notably John McCain and Lindsey Graham, but also Marco Rubio and Rand Paul—who have voiced concern at Trump’s plan to have cozier relations with Russia.

Democrats began sounding the alarm when Trump nominated Tillerson, the CEO of ExxonMobil who was awarded the Russian Order of Friendship in 2013, to be secretary of state. By late December, it looked as though McCain and Graham, with the help of one other senator, could submarine Tillerson’s nomination.

But on Sunday, McCain and Graham folded, releasing a joint statement that said, “Though we still have concerns about his past dealings with the Russian government and President Vladimir Putin, we believe that Mr. Tillerson can be an effective advocate for U.S. interests. The views that Mr. Tillerson has expressed, both privately and publicly during the confirmation process, give us confidence that he will be a champion for a strong and engaged role for America in the world.” Rubio folded on Monday, reportedly after being pressured by Texan oil donors. With support from McCain, Graham, and Rubio, Tillerson will be confirmed.

This was always a marriage of convenience for all parties. Democrats could say that they had bipartisan support in opposition to a cabinet appointment, Graham and McCain could push their hawkish foreign policy, and Little Marco could make a show of being independent, which may prove useful when he runs for president again, which he certainly will.

But it should also be a lesson for Democrats and everyone else to stop putting their faith in the GOP. Whatever resistance there is to Trump will come from outside the Republican Party.


Trump’s EPA is going to be a disaster for science and the environment.

For all the talk about Trump’s populism, his cabinet picks and many of his own proposals, particularly on taxes and regulations, are in line with the ideology of the radical right. Trump’s domestic agenda is one that dramatically favors the ultra-rich at the expense of nearly everyone else, except perhaps coal workers.

Axios Presented by Bank of America has a first look at Trump’s plan to gut the EPA and it is unsurprisingly disturbing if you happen to care about things like scientific research and clean air and water. The Trump administration plans on cutting hundreds of millions of dollars from the EPA’s budget. It plans to stop enforcing Clean Air Act greenhouse gas regulations for new and existing coal and natural gas power plants, fuel economy standards, sections of the Clean Water Act, and plans to clean the Chesapeake Bay. It will also cease to fund scientific research and challenge federal and state permit decisions.

Given Trump’s plan to blow up the Paris climate accords and a congressional plan to give away millions of acres of public lands, Trump’s administration is on track to be even worse than George W. Bush’s when it comes to the environment. What’s perhaps most notable, given Trump’s populism, is that environmental regulation is still widely popular.

Jim Watson/Getty

Talking about Trump, Philip Roth notes that at least Charles Lindbergh had an ethos.

Many have been curious about Roth’s opinion on Trump because the famed novelist is the author of The Plot Against America, an alternative history published in 2004 imagining what would happen if a racist demagogue won the presidency with the slogan “America First.” Thanks to an interview in The New Yorker, we now know that Roth thinks that the real-world victory of Donald Trump is actually stranger than Roth’s own imaginings. “Lindbergh, despite his Nazi sympathies and racist proclivities, was a great aviation hero who had displayed tremendous physical courage and aeronautical genius in crossing the Atlantic in 1927,” Roth notes. “He had character and he had substance and, along with Henry Ford, was, worldwide, the most famous American of his day. Trump is just a con artist. The relevant book about Trump’s American forebear is Herman Melville’s The Confidence-Man, the darkly pessimistic, daringly inventive novel—Melville’s last—that could just as well have been called The Art of the Scam. ”

Roth also notes that neither Richard Nixon nor George W. Bush was as “humanly impoverished as Trump is: ignorant of government, of history, of science, of philosophy, of art, incapable of expressing or recognizing subtlety or nuance, destitute of all decency, and wielding a vocabulary of seventy-seven words that is better called Jerkish than English.”