白宫官员：给川普颁和平奖是FIFA的提议；球迷应合法赴美观赛（白宫官员称FIFA曾提议授予特朗普和平奖；呼吁球迷依法赴美观赛）

Considering user inquiry options

The user sent a statement in Chinese that relates to a news claim about Trump and FIFA. Since they're not asking a direct question, I need to think about what they might want: do they want a summary, context, or verification? I could ask for clarification but should also offer options like summarizing the news, checking facts, or providing background. However, since I may need internet access for verification, I'm thinking about the limitations of my current environment.Exploring user options

I can ask the user if they want me to fact-check and find sources, but that might need network access. In this CLI environment, I'd need to run commands to access the network. So, I’ll keep it simple and ask in Chinese what they’d like: a summary, background, verification, or analysis?

It seems the claim involves a peace prize, perhaps the Nobel Peace Prize. However, FIFA doesn't award peace prizes; that’s done by the Nobel Committee. I should consider that they might be referring to a nomination. Plus, the mention of fans suggests a connection to upcoming soccer events, like the 2026 World Cup.Clarifying user request

I'm pondering whether the user is talking about the 2025 Club World Cup or maybe discussing FIFA urging fans to travel legally amidst immigration concerns. It’s tricky to assert anything without more information. Instead of making assumptions, I should ask what they want and remind them I can fact-check with sources.

I could interpret this claim in various ways while providing disclaimers. There’s no FIFA authority over the Nobel, though they have their own awards. I can mention that if it involves policy, fans must follow visa processes for US matches. I’ll keep it brief and ask in Chinese if they want verification, interpretation, or a summary, cautioning them that this claim seems suspicious.