- Lindsay Clancy Jury Deliberates Fifth Day Without Reaching Verdict
- Germany accuses Russia of drone attack on Leipzig airport
- Israel’s defence and finance ministries clash over military spending amid ongoing conflicts
- Calgary home displaying pro-Trump flags vandalised during trade tensions
- Former Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino retired during internal investigation
- Whitbread to close 66 restaurants and pubs this week ahead of further cuts
- British man rescued alive from rubble after Nepal disaster, authorities confirm
- Keir Starmer resigns as MP to focus on international affairs
LIVE German 2025 Election Results as they come in and analysi on who will be the next German Chancellor.
Knowledge Hub
Global Reaction to DE Elections
When are the German Elections?
The Elections are on Sunday the 23rd of Feb 2025
Why are they having a snap election?
The German coalition government failed a no confidence vote
Do Germans vote?
Germans vote in big numbers, usually as high 70+ percent voter turnout
Lindsay Clancy Jury Deliberates Fifth Day Without Reaching Verdict
Media Lens: Lindsay Clancy Jury Deliberates Fifth Day Without Reaching Verdict
Jury deliberations stretch into fifth day in Lindsay Clancy trial.
Jury deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy trial will stretch into a fifth day. The jury has reported being deadlocked on the verdict according to coverage in Yahoo and The New York Times.
What happened
The Lindsay Clancy trial is ongoing with jury deliberations entering their fifth day. Legal experts are discussing potential verdicts as the jury continues to grapple with their decision.
Key facts
- The Lindsay Clancy trial is currently underway.
- Jury deliberations in the trial are ongoing and have extended into a fifth day.
- The jury has reportedly stated they are deadlocked and unable to reach a verdict.
- Legal experts are discussing potential outcomes of the trial.
- Reports indicate that the jury is working hard on reaching a consensus.
Where coverage differs
- The New York Times emphasizes the jury’s deliberation timeline, while Fox News emphasizes the implications of Clancy’s future with the jurors.
- Yahoo foregrounds the jury being deadlocked rather than discussing potential verdicts, while The Patriot Ledger concentrates on the lack of a verdict at the end of deliberations.
- Outlet A prioritizes commentary from legal experts about potential outcomes, whereas Outlet B focuses on immediate updates from the trial proceedings.
One story, four angles
The New York Times – Lindsay Clancy Trial: Jury Deliberations Will Stretch Into 5th Day
Publication: The New York Times | Primary framing pattern: Legal | Tone: Informative | Intensity: 6/10 | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: High
Expand
Espresso Shot: This article reports on the progression of the jury deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy trial, highlighting the ongoing nature of the deliberations without reaching a verdict yet. It emphasizes the legal framework surrounding the case and the significance of the jury’s role.
Publication emphasis: The focus is on the jury’s extended deliberations during the trial.
Framing analysis: The primary foregrounding reflects legal processes and jury decision-making, while the emotional and human aspects are relatively subdued.
Bias: Selection: Focus on jury deliberation rather than public opinion. Language: Neutral language with legal terminology used. Omission: Less emphasis on public sentiments surrounding the case.
Assessment: The article presents facts surrounding the trial with a focus on legal proceedings, maintaining a neutral tone.
Fox News – Lindsay Clancy’s future rests with jurors as deliberations stretch to a 4th day
Publication: Fox News | Primary framing pattern: Political | Tone: Analytical | Intensity: 7/10 | Sentiment: Slightly Negative | Legal precision: Moderate
Expand
Espresso Shot: The article discusses the political implications surrounding the Clancy trial and emphasizes the responsibility placed on jurors, implying that the outcome could have broader societal repercussions.
Publication emphasis: The focus is on the political weight of jury decisions in the context of the trial.
Framing analysis: Political responsibility is foregrounded, while specific legal arguments and finer details of the case are secondary.
Bias: Selection: Emphasizing the impact of jury decisions on public perception. Language: Engages using charged language suggesting political ramifications. Omission: Limited discussion of factual legal matters surrounding the case.
Assessment: The article leans into the political aspects, framing the jury’s decisions as reflective of larger societal values.
Yahoo – Lindsay Clancy Jury Leaves Court Without Verdict Again After Saying They’re Deadlocked: ‘They’re Working Hard’
Publication: Yahoo | Primary framing pattern: Moral | Tone: Concerned | Intensity: 8/10 | Sentiment: Negative | Legal precision: Moderate
Expand
Espresso Shot: The focus of this article is on the jury’s inability to reach a verdict, portraying a sense of moral crisis regarding the feelings and responsibilities of jurors while tackling a contentious case.
Publication emphasis: Concern for the moral implications of a deadlocked jury and its potential consequences.
Framing analysis: Concerns regarding the jurors’ emotional and psychological burden are foregrounded, putting the trial’s outcome in a moral perspective rather than just a legal one.
Bias: Selection: Emphasis on jurors’ emotional struggles. Language: Suggestive phrases like “working hard” humanize jurors’ responsibilities. Omission: Legal technicalities are not deeply explored.
Assessment: This piece highlights the moral weight of the jury’s role, emphasizing human emotion over pure legal analysis.
The Patriot Ledger – Clancy deliberations Day 4: Deadlocked jury ends day with no verdict
Publication: The Patriot Ledger | Primary framing pattern: Consequence | Tone: Reflective | Intensity: 7/10 | Sentiment: Slightly Negative | Legal precision: Moderate
Expand
Espresso Shot: This report reflects on the consequences of the jury’s inability to reach a verdict, considering the broader implications for the trial, the defendant, and the justice system.
Publication emphasis: Focus on the consequences of a deadlocked jury and its effects on the trial’s future.
Framing analysis: Consequences of the jurors’ decision-making are central, while specific legal arguments are secondary.
Bias: Selection: Analysis of the implications of a deadlocked jury. Language: Calm and reflective language used throughout. Omission: Less emphasis on juroral sentiment or public reaction.
Assessment: The article provides a reflective look at the implications of the jury’s actions within the context of the justice system.
Food for thought
The New York Times employs the strongest legal framing in discussing the Lindsay Clancy trial, emphasizing potential verdict outcomes and the nuances of legal standards that jurors must navigate. Conversely, Fox News adopts the most escalatory framing by portraying the jury’s inability to reach a verdict as a dire situation for Clancy’s future, invoking high stakes and dramatic implications. Yahoo adds to this tension by highlighting the jury’s deadlock while insisting on their diligence, thereby intensifying the narrative of uncertainty. The interplay of legal analysis and emotive language exemplifies distinct perspectives on the unfolding trial.
Germany accuses Russia of drone attack on Leipzig airport
Media Lens: Germany accuses Russia of drone attack on Leipzig airport
Story focus: Germany accuses Russia of drone attack.
Primary entity: Germany | Region: Germany
Germany accused Russia of launching a drone attack on Leipzig airport. The incident has raised significant concerns regarding security in the region.
Quick links: What has happened | Status quo | Confirmed facts | Preconceptions | Elisions | One story, four angles | Related links
What has happened
Germany has accused Russia of conducting a drone attack on Leipzig Airport, an allegation that has escalated tensions between the two nations. This accusation comes amidst ongoing conflicts, with German authorities asserting that evidence points to Russian involvement in this incident.
In response to the attack, Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, has vowed that there will be a significant response from the European Union. As the situation develops, this incident marks a notable point of conflict, reflecting heightened military and geopolitical tensions in the region.
Status quo
Germany has accused Russia of conducting a drone attack on Leipzig airport. This claim follows the recent escalation of tensions between the two countries amidst ongoing geopolitical conflicts. The German government has stated that it will respond accordingly to this incident, signaling a potential shift in diplomatic relations. This accusation adds to the series of hostile exchanges between Berlin and Moscow in recent months. The details surrounding the attack are currently under investigation.
Confirmed facts
- Germany has accused Russia of a drone attack on Leipzig airport.
- Germany’s Defense Minister Boris Pistorius stated Russia is behind the drone attack.
- Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, vowed a response to the incident.
- The incident has been reported widely in news outlets including Al Jazeera, BBC, and Politico.
Preconceptions
- Al Jazeera prioritises the implication of Russia in the drone attack incident, highlighting specific accusations from Germany that focus on direct blame.
- The BBC emphasizes the statement from Germany regarding Russia’s involvement, framing it within the context of broader geopolitical tensions, while providing historical background to the accusations.
- Euronews places emphasis on the response from the European Union and the implications for political action, reflecting a forward-looking approach to consequences of the event.
- Politico focuses on the perspectives of defense executives regarding the state of war-like conditions between Germany and Russia, reducing coverage on the immediate details of the drone attack itself.
- In contrast to the detailed operational aspects highlighted by Al Jazeera and BBC, less attention is paid to the drone attack’s specifics in publications like Politico, which concentrates on ongoing political discussions.
Elisions
- Al Jazeera highlights Germany’s direct accusation against Russia for the drone attack on Leipzig airport, focusing on immediate diplomatic repercussions.
- BBC’s coverage includes an analysis of the broader implications of the drone attack on German-Russian relations, which is not emphasized in Al Jazeera’s report.
- Politico features expert commentary on the potential military implications of the drone incident, while Al Jazeera primarily reports on the political fallout, missing strategic insights.
One story, four angles
Al Jazeera – Germany accuses Russia of drone attack on Leipzig airport
Publication: Al Jazeera | Intensity: (7/10) | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: Moderate
Expand
Espresso Shot: The use of “accuses” underscores a focus on the claim’s uncertainty, leading readers to question the confirmed nature of Germany’s allegations against Russia at the onset.
Key differences:
1. **Framing of Responsibility:** Al Jazeera uses the term “accuses,” which emphasizes an adversarial stance and suggests the need for substantiation of the claims being made when compared to BBC’s more definitive “says Russia behind.”
2. **Contextual Detail:** Al Jazeera’s headline mentions “Leipzig airport,” providing a specific location, while Euronews opts for a broader phrasing in “incident in Germany,” impacting urgency perception.
3. **Language Nuance:** Al Jazeera employs a softer tone with “drone attack,” implying a level of severity that is less confrontational than Politico’s reference to “war” suggesting higher stakes.
Bias: Selection: Features the accusation without mentioning possible evidence; Language: Uses “accuses” which carries an implication of unproven claims; Omission: Lacks context on historical tensions which might inform the accusation’s background.
Assessment: Readers might first believe that Germany’s claims against Russia are highly contentious and possibly unsupported.
BBC – Germany says Russia behind Leipzig airport drone attack
Publication: BBC | Intensity: (8/10) | Sentiment: Positive | Legal precision: High
Expand
Espresso Shot: The use of “says Russia behind” conveys a direct accusation rather than merely noting an accusation, which draws the reader’s focus to the assertion of responsibility.
Key differences:
1. **Direct Assertion:** BBC’s phrase “says Russia behind” presents the accusation as a definitive statement, in contrast to Al Jazeera’s more tentative “accuses,” promoting a stronger narrative of responsibility.
2. **Urgency of Action:** The inclusion of “drone attack” elevates the perceived threat level in BBC’s framing compared to Al Jazeera’s more subdued terminology.
3. **Contextual Authority:** BBC’s approach appears more authoritative, driven by its track record of journalistic standards, compared to the softer term usage found in Al Jazeera.
Bias: Selection: Prioritizes the government’s narrative without core opposition opinions; Language: Chooses assertive terms that may influence reader perception toward urgency; Omission: Lacks mention of possible counterclaims or investigations into the validity of allegations.
Assessment: Readers may initially assume a clear, definitive accusing stance against Russia without understanding potential complexities involved.
Euronews.com – Von der Leyen vows response to Russian drone incident in Germany
Publication: Euronews.com | Intensity: (6/10) | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: Moderate
Expand
Espresso Shot: By focusing on a “response” from Von der Leyen, Euronews draws immediate attention to the potential for policy change, engaging readers with implications for future actions.
Key differences:
1. **Focus on Reaction:** Euronews highlights a call to action with “vows response,” shifting emphasis from responsibility for the attack to government action, contrasting with other outlets focusing on blame attribution.
2. **Descriptive Language:** The term “incident” suggests a less aggressive context than “attack” as used by other outlets like BBC and Al Jazeera, which refines the framing of the event.
3. **Actor Framing:** By centering on Von der Leyen’s response, Euronews subtly positions her as a primary actor, contrasting with the other outlets that frame the story around accusations predominantly.
Bias: Selection: Emphasizes the official response while minimizing the depth of the initial accusations; Language: Uses less confrontational terms, possibly downplaying the urgency; Omission: Lacks detailed coverage of the broader geopolitical context behind the accusations.
Assessment: Readers are likely to interpret the story as an evolving narrative about political responses rather than purely adversarial accusations.
Politico.eu – ‘Germany and Russia are at war,’ says top defense exec
Publication: Politico.eu | Intensity: (9/10) | Sentiment: Negative | Legal precision: Low
Expand
Espresso Shot: The sensational nature of “at war” sharply pulls readers into a dramatic framing, emphasizing the high stakes of the conflict between Germany and Russia.
Key differences:
1. **Dramatic Tone:** Politico’s use of the phrase “are at war” presents a high-stakes narrative, whereas other sources utilize more cautious language, such as “accuses” in Al Jazeera or “says” in BBC.
2. **Focus on Military Perspective:** The framing is directly from a defense executive, which lends a specific military viewpoint absent in the other outlets, focusing on contextual urgency rather than event-based reporting.
3. **Lack of Evidence or Backing:** The headline omits details of the context or evidence supporting the claim, which could mislead readers into believing this statement reflects an official stance rather than an opinion.
Bias: Selection: Highlights a singular perspective that may skew wider understanding of the situation; Language: Uses alarmist terms, which could exaggerate perceived danger; Omission: Doesn’t provide necessary context or varying viewpoints on the accusation or military stance.
Assessment: This headline may lead readers to believe that tensions have escalated dramatically, potentially skewing perception toward viewing the conflict as outright war.
Al Jazeera portrays the incident as a serious accusation from Germany towards Russia, emphasizing potential implications, thus framing it strongly. The BBC adopts a slightly more reserved stance, indicating Germany’s position, which is less directly confrontational but still serious. Euronews takes a more proactive approach, highlighting European leadership’s vow for a response. Politico’s framing is the most escalatory, characterizing the situation as a war-like context between Germany and Russia, enhancing fears of escalation. In summary, Al Jazeera’s framing is the strongest, while Politico’s is the most escalatory. The facts do not change. What changes is where scrutiny lands.
Related links
Al Jazeera
Germany accuses Russia of drone attack on Leipzig airport
BBC
Germany says Russia behind Leipzig airport drone attack
Euronews.com
Von der Leyen vows response to Russian drone incident in Germany
politico.eu
Israel’s defence and finance ministries clash over military spending amid ongoing conflicts
Get you up to speed: Israel’s multiple wars see finance, defence ministries clash over spending
Israel’s Ministries of Finance and Defence are currently in dispute over military spending amid escalating costs from ongoing conflicts, with the government facing budget pressures. The Israeli military has warned that unresolved funding issues could jeopardise national security.
Israeli military authorities have reported a planned widescale deployment in the occupied West Bank to address escalating settler violence amid the forthcoming Jewish holidays. Tensions continue between the Ministries of Finance and Defence, with officials indicating that military spending cuts could impact intelligence operations and the readiness of reserve forces.
Israel’s defence and finance ministries are engaged in a budget dispute exacerbated by ongoing military operations, with Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir asserting that the military is functioning with “empty coffers.” To address escalating tensions and anticipated violence during the Jewish holidays, the Israeli army has announced plans for an increased deployment in the occupied West Bank.
What remains unclear — It is uncertain how the Israeli government plans to balance military funding demands with budget constraints amid ongoing conflicts and upcoming elections.
Israel’s defence and finance ministries clash over military spending amid ongoing conflicts
News|Israel-Palestine conflictIsrael’s multiple wars see finance, defence ministries clash over spending
Spiraling costs of Israel’s conflicts deepen rift between finance and defense ministries ahead of budget decisions.
Published On 1 Sep 20261 Sep 2026
Israel’s Ministries of Finance and Defence have clashed over the spiralling costs of Israel’s multiple and ongoing wars in the region, which are adding pressure to the government’s budget.
The Israeli military has warned that if the dispute is unresolved it could jeopardise the security of the country.
Since the war on Gaza began in October 2023, Israel has entered its longest period of sustained conflict in its history.
Israeli forces are deployed in Lebanon and Syria as they continue to occupy the Gaza and the West Bank, and are prepared for further conflict with Iran.
Israeli military Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir warned that these costly conflicts are being undertaken with “empty coffers.”
The Israeli government has attempted to inject a further 15 billion shekels ($5bn) into the military, the Israeli news website YNet reported, increasing the 2026 defence budget to 184 billion shekels ($60.8bn). The defence funding is a near-record in the country’s history, second only to the 188 billion shekels ($62.2bn) spent on defence during the first year of its genocide in Gaza.
Tensions between Israel’s defence and finance ministries have been building for some time, with the two sides divided over the scale and management of military spending.
In late August, YNet News reported that the dispute was likely to continue even after the additional funding had been approved.
Senior finance officials rejected the military’s claim that it was “on the edge of the abyss” and warned that meeting its demands could push military spending to nearly one-third of the country’s entire state budget, the Israeli media outlet added.
“Everything costs money. Their only mode of operation is using military force, as we’ve seen in Lebanon, Syria, Gaza and Iran, but they never seem to want to talk about paying for it,” Yossi Mekelberg, a senior consulting fellow at Chatham House, told WTX News.
“It costs. The hardware, the ammunition, the soldiers, and the benefits if they’re injured,” he said. “It all needs paying for, which is something they rarely seem to want to discuss.”
Complicating the picture is the fragmented nature of Israeli politics, said Makelberg. Politicians compete for small and often uncompromising parts of the electorate that are often unwilling or unable to see beyond their own interests.
That was especially true for Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, whose far-right Religious Zionist Party might not pass the electoral threshold to sit in the next Knesset.
“Smotrich is in an uncomfortable position. On the one hand, he needs the support of these hardcore nationalists who demand more expenditure on the military and their occupation of the West Bank. On the other, as minister of finance, he has to pay for it,” he said.
Israel’s armed forces chief, Lieutenant-General Eyal Zamir (centre), has said the army is engaged in a separate “battle” over its budget, one that it is fighting with “empty coffers” [File: Menahem Kahana/AFP]
Blame games
Briefings from within the Israeli military have blamed foot-dragging from the Finance Ministry for a number of potential spending cuts. This includes a sharp reduction in reserve forces in the Northern and Southern Commands, while the West Bank Division will be maintained at current levels despite heightened tensions and security warnings after a wave of settler pogroms against Palestinians in the occupied territory.
The military has also warned that it will significantly scale back intelligence gathering, where operations rely on costly technologies. At the same time, the military has warned that it will need to prepare for a possible escalation with Iran and other threats, including the Houthis in Yemen and pro-Iranian Shia militias in Iraq. All of this will require continuous costly training and adequate stocks of spare parts and munitions.
“Struggling departments often blame the Ministry of Finance for their own problems, much in the way that the government of developing countries sometimes blame the IMF [International Monetary Fund],” said Michael Ben-Gad, a professor of economics at City St George’s, University of London said.
“The Ministry of Finance will make sure the army’s funded. Most of the people in the ministry have family in the army and/or served themselves.”
The political difficulty, especially close to an election, is to be seen to oppose the army.
“Smotrich can either pay now and raise taxes after the election, or pay now and then criticise the next government for doing just that,” Ben-Gad said.
The Israeli army has said it is placing a further division on standby ahead of anticipated settler violence during the forthcoming Jewish holidays [File: Majdi Mohammed/AP]
Future wars
Few ministers are showing any appetite to curb Israel’s military endeavours, despite the warnings of “empty coffers”. In the occupied West Bank, the Israeli army has announced it is preparing a widescale deployment to stem the unrestrained settler violence that many in the government, including Smotrich, have been accused of encouraging.
At the same time, Israel is preparing for an escalation in the conflict with Iran. Billions of dollars are being spent to replenish munition supplies that were expended in both the last war with Iran and Israel’s neighbours.
“It’s like a rule of nature. Every year, the Israeli army asks for more money and every year the Ministry of Finance will impose a cut of around one to two percent across all other departments to pay for it,” Israeli political analyst Nimrod Flaschenberg told WTX News.
“We’re seeing a fresh military doctrine develop where the Israeli army is establishing front lines in enemy territory, with what they call ‘dead zones’ behind it,” he said.
Not one of the frontrunners in October’s election was questioning the wisdom of that tactic.
“If this is the new doctrine, then it could be an expensive one, as those frontlines are going to need to be replenished with both manpower and equipment,” Flaschenberg said.
“There might be disagreements over how that capacity is eventually deployed, but not the doctrine of building it up.”
Calgary home displaying pro-Trump flags vandalised during trade tensions
Get you up to speed: Calgary home with pro-Trump flags vandalized amid cross-border trade war
A U.S. homeowner, who supports the Trump administration, has expressed their decision to remain in Calgary, Canada, citing the life they have built there. The individual moved to Canada for work opportunities.
The U.S. homeowner indicated that their move to Calgary was driven by work opportunities. No further details have been provided regarding the homeowner’s employment situation or their long-term plans in Canada.
The U.S. homeowner, who requested anonymity, explained their continued residency in Canada by stating, “it’s because they have built a life in Calgary.” This sentiment reflects a broader trend among expatriates who are weighing their commitments to both their home countries and their adopted communities.
What remains unclear — The homeowner did not specify what work they are currently engaged in in Calgary.
Calgary home displaying pro-Trump flags vandalised during trade tensions

Asked why they remain in Canada even with their support for the Trump administration, the U.S. homeowner who came here for work said it’s because they have built a life in Calgary.
Former Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino retired during internal investigation
Get you up to speed: Gregory Bovino, former Border Patrol commander, was under internal investigation when he retired, records show
Gregory Bovino, the former Border Patrol commander at large, is under internal investigation due to concerns over his testimony in federal court and past alleged antisemitic comments. The inquiry was confirmed by Customs and Border Protection, which sent Bovino a notification on March 2, after which he submitted a retirement request 16 days later.
Customs and Border Protection initiated an official inquiry into Gregory Bovino’s conduct on March 2, and he submitted his retirement request 16 days later. The investigation includes allegations regarding his credibility and past remarks, with CBP documents suggesting concerns that his testimony could be impaired as a result.
Customs and Border Protection confirmed that Gregory Bovino was under internal investigation due to allegations of misconduct, stating, “DHS does not comment on matters regarding personnel who are no longer with the agency.” Following his retirement, measures to address issues of credibility and past comments, including alleged antisemitic remarks, may be evaluated by the agency, although immediate public responses have not yet emerged.
What remains unclear — The specifics of the internal investigation into Bovino’s alleged misconduct and the implications of District Judge Ellis’s findings on his credibility are not fully detailed.
Former Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino retired during internal investigation
Former Border Patrol commander at large Gregory Bovino, who led the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in Minneapolis and other major cities, was under internal investigation due to concerns over his testimony in federal court and for past alleged antisemitic comments when he retired, according to records released last week that were reviewed by WTX US News.
Customs and Border Protection informed Bovino in an email on March 2 that the agency was “conducting an official Inquiry into allegations of misconduct reported to CBP.” Just 16 days later, Bovino sent an official retirement relocation request.
The investigation was first reported by the Chicago Tribune.
WTX US News has reached out to CBP and the Department of Homeland Security for comment.
In a statement to WTX US News, a CBP spokesperson said, “DHS does not comment on matters regarding personnel who are no longer with the agency.”
The statement added, “Bovino voluntarily retired from CBP. CBP is not authorized to provide any security for retired personnel.”
While federal privacy rules restrict disclosure of certain personnel records, there is no blanket law or publicly available DHS policy barring comment on former employees.
Bovino, who was a longtime Border Patrol official, was the public face of the Trump administration’s controversial immigration crackdown in Los Angeles, and then Chicago, Charlotte, New Orleans and ultimately, Minneapolis.
Bovino was relieved of his role as “commander-at-large” in late January after the fatal shootings of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis — and the response from Bovino and other officials — triggered widespread political backlash.
Immediately after Pretti’s killing, Bovino, citing no evidence, claimed that Pretti intended to “massacre” federal agents.
Border Patrol had already been under investigation for its controversial tactics. A lawsuit filed by the Chicago Headline Club and other groups in Fall 2025 said Border Patrol unleashed an “unnecessarily brutal enforcement of the immigration laws” by deploying agents like teargas, pepper balls and rubber bullets against press and protesters. U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis issued a preliminary injunction limiting use of force and accused Bovino of lying about altercations with agents.
“Most tellingly, Bovino admitted in his deposition that he lied multiple times about the events that occurred in Little Village that prompted him to throw tear gas at protesters,” Ellis wrote.
The letter from CBP sent to Bovino in March addressed this case, asking the former official to consider several questions, including, “Do you agree that District Judge Ellis’ findings about your lack of credibility would have to be disclosed if you were called to testify in a trial?”
The investigator asked Bovino what should happen when a federal judge finds a Border Patrol agent’s testimony to be not credible, then went onto ask whether Bovino believed Ellis’s findings made him “Giglio impaired” — a reference to prosecutors’ obligation to disclose credibility problems that may be used later to impeach law-enforcement witnesses. The line of inquiry suggests CBP was analyzing whether Ellis’s findings created a problem for Bovino beyond the immediate litigation.
The Seventh Circuit later vacated Ellis’s preliminary-injunction order without determining whether or not her credibility findings about Bovino were correct.
He was also asked about alleged antisemitic comments. Rather than ask broadly about his remarks, the investigator puts his alleged statement directly to him: “Did you make a comment to the effect of ‘Do Orthodox criminals also take off Saturday?'” The investigator followed up with, “What did you mean by this comment?”
According to The New York Times, Bovino allegedly learned he was under investigation for disparaging a Minneapolis judge for taking off for Shabbat.
In the CBP documents, Bovino also was asked if he made a comment about “chosen people,” an apparent reference to Jewish people.
Bovino was asked if both his testimony and these comments violated the CBP Board of Conduct. Section 7.7.2 says, “employees will be professional in their contact with supervisors, subordinates, coworkers, and members of the public” and 7.7.11 says, “employees will not make abusive, derisive, profane, or harassing statements or gestures, or engage in any other conduct evidencing hatred or invidious prejudice to or about another person or group on account of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, or disability.”
Whitbread to close 66 restaurants and pubs this week ahead of further cuts
Get you up to speed: Major franchise to close 66 restaurants and pubs this week – full list | News UK
Whitbread has announced the closure of 66 restaurants and pubs across three chains, including Bar + Block, Cookhouse + Pub, and Table Table, set to take place on September 3. This decision follows earlier announcements regarding the closure of 200 Beefeater and Brewers Fayre restaurants scheduled for September 7 and 10, respectively.
Whitbread plans to close a total of 66 restaurants and pubs across its Bar + Block, Cookhouse + Pub, and Table Table chains on September 3. This follows the earlier announcement that 200 Beefeater and Brewers Fayre locations will also shut down on September 7 and 10, respectively.
Whitbread’s decision to close 66 restaurants and pubs this week follows its earlier announcement of shutting 200 Beefeater and Brewers Fayre establishments. The closures are part of a strategic shift towards an “integrated food and beverage offer,” with all affected locations set to cease operations by September 3, just days before the additional closures on September 7 and 10.
What remains unclear — It is uncertain how many employees will be affected by the closures of the 66 restaurants and pubs.
Whitbread to close 66 restaurants and pubs this week ahead of further cuts
More than 60 restaurants and bars are closing this week as Premier Inn owner Whitbread confirms more shutdowns.
Back in July, Whitbread announced that 200 Beefeater and Brewers Fayre restaurants would close in September 2026.
This week, the same company is shutting 66 restaurants and pubs across three chains: popular steakhouse chain Bar + Block; Cookhouse + Pub; and family-friendly pub chain Table Table.
All affected locations will shut on September 3, just one week before the 200Brewers Fayre and Beefeater restaurants are planned to shut on September 7 and 10 respectively.
So which restaurants are shutting?
Sign up for all of the latest stories
All Bar + Block closures
A total of 20 Bar + Block locations will close on September 3rd, including seven branches located in London.
- The Brickfield
- Butterfley Park
- Birmingham, Exchange Street
- Birmingham, Waterloo Street
- Edinburgh
- Glasgow
- Leamington Spa
- London, Aldgate
- London, Hammersmith
- London, King’s Cross
- London, Paddington
- London, Southwark
- London, Sutton
- London, Wimbledon
- Milton Keynes
- Newcastle
- Nottingham
- Portsmouth
- Whiteley
- Winnersh
The restaurant chain shared a heartfelt post on Instagram last week, thanking customers and staff for their continued support.
The post reads: ‘We are immensely grateful to every guest who came through our doors, and to our passionate team who made every experience unforgettable.
‘Before we mix our final drink and serve our last steak on September 3, we’d love to welcome you back one last time.’
It continued: ‘Come raise a glass, savour your favourite dish, and toast to the memories we’ve made together.’
Full list of all Table Table closures
All 32 Table Table pub and restaurant locations will shut on September 3, including:
- Ashbridge Inn, Cwmbran
- Balkerne Gate, Essex
- Barley Twist, Yorkshire
- Barum Gate, Devon
- The Bishopsgate, Lancashire
- Bowling Green, Essex
- The Callywith, Cornwall
- The Colliers, Staffordshire
- The Derby Lodge, Merseyside
- French Connection, Kent
- The Gateway, Hampshire
- The Harbour, Gwynedd
- Horse & Jockey, Bedfordshire
- John Milne, Lancashire
- Langton Inn, Leicestershire
- The Lee Burn, Lanarkshire
- Marine Court, Kent
- Mill of Mundurno, Aberdeenshire
- Morfa, Denbighshire
- The Nelson, Norfolk
- The Ormonde, Suffolk
- Pantruthn Farm, Mid Glamorgan
- Parc Britannia, Gwynedd
- Pentrebach House, Merthyr Tydfil
- The Red Lion, Hampshire
- The Ridgacre, West Midlands
- The Showground, Norfolk
- Smugglers Retreat, Kent
- The Stanhope Arms, Staffordshire
- Swinging Bridge, Lancashire
- The Trevithick Inn, Cornwall
- Willow Farm, Essex
Every Cookhouse + Pub location shutting this week
Finally, the Cookhouse + Pub chain is shutting all 14 of its locations this week, including:
- The Brickfield, Kent
- Butterfley Park, Derby
- Cotton Mill, Kilmarnock
- The Freeman, Bridlington
- The Highwayman, St Neots
- Honourable Pilot, Kent
- Inn on the Park, Enfield
- Lockyers Quay, Plymouth
- Penhale Round, Cornwall
- Potters Arms, Harlow
- The Queen Inn, West Midlands
- The Steamboat, Skegness
- Three Piers, Blackpool
- Woodhorn Grange, Ashington
The closures come as Whitbread moves to shut all of its standalone restaurant chains, pivoting instead to an ‘integrated food and beverage offer’.
It also comes as the UK high street continues to face an onslaught of closures.
Earlier this week, mini-supermarket group Foreways announced that it was closing all five of its locations in Carlisle, Cumbria.
Meanwhile, accessories brand Radley shut all of its shops and website last month, Morrisons announced plans to close 100 of its Daily convenience store locations, and Quiz Clothing shut its doors, too.
Comments
Add as preferred source
The Diaspora Dish
Join the family and sign up to The Diaspora Dish newsletter – series two is on its way and it’s coming in hot! New recipes, new chef interviews.
Local insights
Related Election News
LIVE German 2025 Election
Subscribe to Updates
Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.












