El Salvador

The penalty awarded against the Senegalese national team in the final moments of their match against Belgium on Wednesday caused widespread controversy after it led to their elimination from the Round of 32 at the 2026 World Cup, in a harsh turn of events that saw the “Lions of Teranga” go from leading 2-0 to losing 3-2.

Honduran referee Said Martinez awarded a penalty kick at the end of the second period of extra time, after a VAR review, following a challenge by Senegal’s Lamine Camara on Belgian captain Youri Tielemans, with the score tied 2-2 and the match heading towards a penalty shootout.

The “Archivo VAR” platform, which specialises in analysing refereeing decisions, said that VAR intervened excessively during the match, confirming that it was Tielemans who extended his foot in front of Camara, causing the contact.

The platform added, via its account on “X,” that the incident did not warrant VAR intervention, explaining that it was the Belgian player who forced the contact entirely, and that the situation did not amount to the clear and obvious error needed to justify the referee reviewing the decision.

The decision triggered a wave of controversy on social media, with one fan writing: “This is 100% robbery. Senegal have been robbed. How is this a penalty? Belgium do not deserve to go through corruption.”

Sports content creator Sneako blamed the result on match ‘”rigging”.

“Rigged! Senegal should storm the pitch right now. Leave the pitch and go home. This is rigged!”

Another sports fan wrote: “I’m sorry, but this was never a penalty. Camara went to clear the ball, but it was Tielemans who got in his way. Senegal was robbed, and it should have been Belgium going out.”

Spanish sports journalist Manolo Lama commented: “They stole the Africa Cup of Nations from them, and now they’re stealing all the solidarity with Senegal at the World Cup too.”

Egyptian journalist Mohamed Saeed linked the incident to what happened in the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations final against Morocco, writing: “You can feel that the penalty awarded against Senegal in the final seconds was a harsh lesson and a difficult test. After the scenes from the Africa Cup of Nations final, I think that if it weren’t for the change in the rules around the withdrawal incident, this scene could have repeated itself.”

Another sports fan, Fares Ahmed, wrote that football ”teaches lessons” and the outcome brought back the memory of Senegal at the tournament in Morocco.

“They took advantage of the tournament’s vulnerable position and the host’s need to make it a success, and used that to impose their pressure,” Ahmed wrote. “Today, the scene was almost repeated against Belgium — a penalty in the final minutes, objections, and disbelief over the decision — but this time there was no threat of withdrawal, because you can’t risk penalties like that in a tournament the size of the World Cup.”

Drawing a connection between the two events, one follower wrote on “X”: “When there was a clear penalty in the Morocco final, they rebelled against the decision and tarnished the reputation of African football, just because the tournament was in Morocco. But when an unclear penalty came along that eliminated them from the World Cup, they stayed silent, because this time it was in the West.”

After the dramatic penalty was awarded, Tielemans stepped up to take it and scored successfully, netting Belgium’s third goal and capping off an unexpected comeback that eliminated the Lions of Teranga.

But back on the pitch, Senegal had the run of play for 85 minutes. The African team held a two-goal lead, and had all but secured a spot in the round of 16 at the World Cup.

Within five minutes, it crumbled and the players were feeling it.

“We were at the heart of writing the beautiful pages of the history of our football in this world,” defender Krepin Diatta said. “And we have to accept that we failed at our mission.”

Senegal midfielder Habib Diarra said. “We had a good first half, but it wasn’t enough. A match lasts 90 minutes, and we’re devastated. It’s very tough. I don’t know what to say. When you’re on the pitch, you have to give your all, and that’s not what we did. We’ve only got ourselves to blame.”

SAN SALVADOR — The number of people deported to El Salvador from the U.S. nearly doubled in the first months of 2026, according to official figures, coming as Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele has positioned himself as an ally willing to help the Trump administration accelerate deportations, a central priority.

The U.S. deported 5,033 Salvadorans back to their country in the first three months of 2026 compared with 2,547 deportees in the same period in 2025, according to El Salvador migration authority figures obtained by the Associated Press on Tuesday.

That marks nearly a 98% increase at the same time that the Trump administration has boosted deportation flights across the world. Globally, deportation flights from the U.S. rose an estimated 61% between 2024 and 2025, according to data compiled by the Asociación Agenda Migrante El Salvador, or AAMES, and other organizations.

The U.S. has stopped regularly releasing deportation data, so experts instead are relying on other information from countries such as El Salvador, deportation flights and other numbers.

The sharp increase in deportations “confirms a real hardening of the U.S. immigration system toward the region,” said César Ríos of AAMES.

The jump comes as Bukele, a tough-on-crime politician, has sought to align himself with President Trump, and the U.S. government has lined up allies across Latin America to help the Republican carry out his agenda. While Mexico and other Central American nations have quietly accepted deportees from third countries, Bukele has boldly embraced Trump’s efforts in Latin America.

In March 2025, Bukele most notably accepted 238 Venezuelan deportees accused of being members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and locked them up in a mega-prison built for accused gang members in the Salvadoran leader’s ongoing offensive on domestic gangs. The incident fueled widespread accusations of human rights abuses.

The geopolitical firestorm came after Trump’s government struck a deal with Bukele to accept what they described as transfer and imprisonment of foreign criminals to El Salvador. Under the agreement, El Salvador would receive $6 million from the U.S.

In March 2025, the Trump administration mistakenly deported Kilmar Abrego García, a Maryland resident and Salvadoran citizen with protected status in the U.S., setting off yet another legal and political controversy. Bukele originally refused to return Abrego García and denied accusations of beating and torture — which have been widely documented by human rights groups in Salvadoran prisons.

He was returned to the U.S. in June to face charges that he helped bring immigrants to the U.S. illegally, something his lawyers call “baseless.” Abrego García has pleaded not guilty and asked a judge to dismiss his case as the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced that it hoped to deport Abrego García to Liberia.

Even more recently, Bukele joined a coalition of other right-leaning Trump allies in a group of countries that the Republican president dubbed the Shield of the Americas, purportedly aimed at cracking down on criminal groups in Latin America, even though the two most essential countries in that effort — Mexico and Colombia — refused to attend.

Meanwhile, many migrants in the U.S. are turning their eyes on U.S. Supreme Court arguments as Trump seeks to stop shielding hundreds of thousands of migrants from Haiti and Syria, a decision many of the more than 200,000 Salvadoran migrants with temporary protections worry might eventually affect them.

Bukele has helped the U.S. with its immigration agenda even before Trump entered office.

In 2023, El Salvador’s government began to slap a $1,130 fee on travelers from dozens of countries connecting through the nation’s main airport, amid pressure from the Biden administration to help control the number of migrants moving toward the United States’ southern border. At the same time, migration from El Salvador, fueled by gang violence and poverty, dipped after Bukele’s contentious war on the gangs.

Analysts said that Bukele’s government used dips in migration as a bargaining chip to offset human rights criticisms by the U.S.

Alemán and Janetsky write for the Associated Press. Janetsky reported from Mexico City.

WASHINGTON — FBI Director Kash Patel angrily lashed out at a Democratic lawmaker at a budget hearing Tuesday, calling allegations that he drinks excessively on the job and has been unreachable at times to his staff “unequivocally, categorically false.”

“I will not be tarnished by baseless allegations,” Patel told Sen. Chris Van Hollen when the Maryland Democrat confronted him about a recent article in the Atlantic magazine that painted an unflattering portrait of his leadership of the nation’s premier federal law enforcement agency. Patel has sued over the story. The Atlantic has said it stands by its reporting and will vigorously defend against the “meritless lawsuit.”

Patel shouted over Van Hollen and sought to turn the tables by accusing him of “slinging margaritas” in El Salvador, a reference to a visit the Democrat paid last year to Kilmar Abrego Garcia while he was jailed there following his arrest in Maryland.

The testy exchange occurred at an annual Senate committee budget hearing featuring Patel and other senior law enforcement leaders.

Tucker writes for the Associated Press.