table

Poker chip trays that can secretly read cards.

Glasses that can detect card markings.

Rigged underground games run by the New York mafia.

NBA figures exchanging insider information as part of illegal betting schemes.

These are some of the wild allegations filed in two criminal complaints this week by federal prosecutors in one of the most sweeping and sensational betting scandals in recent professional sports history.

At the heart of one of the cases, prosecutors charged several figures using private insider NBA information, such as when players would sit out, to help others profit in leveraged bets online.

But the allegations go far deeper, including a connection to the Lakers, the mob and more.

Here are four key allegations:

1. High-roller games with high-tech cheating

Portland Trail Blazers coach Chauncey Billups, who played with the Clippers for two seasons and later was a member of Clippers coach Ty Lue’s staff before earning the Trail Blazers head coaching job, is charged with rigging underground poker games that three of New York’s Mafia families backed, authorities said.

Billups and Damon Jones, a retired NBA player, according to one of the two indictments revealed Thursday, were used to attract wealthy players to the games and were referred to as “Face Cards.” But according to the federal indictment, the two were part of the cheating teams. In exchange for taking part in the games, the “Face Cards” received part of the winnings.

The teams, according to court filings, used rigged shuffling machines that read deck cards and predicted which player on the table would have the best poker hand and relayed that information to someone, referred to as the operator. That person then relayed that information to one member of the cheating team on the table, known as the “Quarterback,” or “Driver,” according to court filings.

In some cases, the cheating teams used poker chip trays that could secretly read the cards on the table. In other cases, players used glasses that could detect special markings on the cards.

U.S. Attorney Joseph Nocella of Brooklyn said at a press conference said the defendants used “special contact lenses or eyeglasses that could read pre-marked cards” and tables that “could read cards face down on the table … because of the X-ray technology.”

He cited “other cheating technologies, such as poker chip tray analyzers, which is a poker chip tray that secretly reads cards using a hidden camera,.”

“Anyone who knows Chauncey Billups knows he is a man of integrity; men of integrity do not cheat and defraud others,” Chris Heywood, Billups’ attorney, said in a statement Tuesday night. “To believe that Chauncey Billups did what the federal government is accusing him of is to believe that he would risk his Hall-of-Fame legacy, his reputation, and his freedom. He would not jeopardize those things for anything, let alone a card game.”

2. Alleged mob ties

The games in the New York area were backed by three of New York’s organized crime families: the Bonanno, Gambino and Genovese Mafia families, authorities said. According to the complaint, at least a dozen of the 31 defendants were associates or members of those three families.

Among those named in the indictment was Joseph Lanni, identified as a captain in the Gambino crime family. Known as “Joe Brooklyn,” Lanni was also named as a defendant in a 2023 racketeering, extortion and witness retaliation indictment, where members and associates of the Gambino family were accused of trying to take control of New York’s carting and demolition industries.

Last week, Lanni pleaded guilty to one count of racketeering conspiracy, according to court records.

3. A tip about LeBron James

Federal prosecutors allege that between December 2022 and March 2024, the defendants , used inside information to defraud bettors, including which players would be sitting out games and when players would “pull themselves out of games early for purported injuries or illnesses.”

Damon Jones, a retired NBA player and friend of LeBron James is accused of inside information for sports betting related to the Lakers and specifically “Player 3,” a prominent NBA player.

Although the indictment does not name the player — the date referenced in 2023 when the player sat out matches when James sat out against the Milwaukee Bucks due to ankle soreness. According to the indictment, Jones, a friend of James, profited from the non-public information.

“Get a big bet on Milwaukee tonight before the information is out!” Jones texted an unnamed co-conspirator, according to the indictment. “[Player 3] is out tonight.”

On Thursday, the Lakers declined to comment on the investigation. A person close to LeBron James told The Times that the Lakers star didn’t know that Jones was allegedly selling injury information to gamblers placing bets. Neither James or the Lakers have been accused of any wrongdoing.

3. A ‘shady’ injury

According to the indictment, when Terry Rozier was playing for the Hornets, he told others he was planning to leave the game early with a “supposed injury,” allowing others to place wagers that raked in thousands of dollars, New York Police Commissioner Jennifer Tisch said.

Rozier and other defendants allegedly provided that information to other co-conspirators in exchange for either a flat fee or a share of betting profits.

Another game involving Rozier that has been in question was played a day earlier, on March 23, 2023, between the Hornets and the New Orleans Pelicans. Rozier played the first 9 minutes and 36 seconds of that game — and not only did not return that night, citing a foot issue, but also did not play again that season.

Posts still online from March 23, 2023, show that some bettors were furious with sportsbooks that evening when it became evident that Rozier was not going to return, with many turning to social media to say that something “shady” had gone on regarding the prop bets involving his stats for that night.

Goud and Sharma star with the ball in Colombo to give the tournament hosts their second win in two games, while Pakistan lose two in two.

India stormed to an 88-run win against Pakistan in their highly anticipated ICC Women’s World Cup 2025 encounter in Colombo, and moved to the top of the points table with four points.

Tournament hosts India posted 247 in their 50 overs, having been bowled out on the last ball of their innings on Sunday in bowler-friendly conditions in the Sri Lankan capital, which is hosting all of Pakistan’s matches as a neutral venue.

Pakistan stuttered and collapsed in reply and were put under pressure right away by young Indian seam bowler Kranti Goud, who took three wickets for 20 runs in her 10 overs.

The team in green struggled with the conditions and the weight of the opposition, who have now beaten them in all 12 of their meetings in one-day internationals.

The match drew more than the usual attention due to the ongoing political tensions between the South Asian neighbours, who were involved in a four-day armed and aerial conflict in May.

Much like the men’s fixtures between the nations at the recent Asia Cup, there were no handshakes at the toss nor at the end of the match between the sides.

The toss went Pakistan’s way and, having been put in, India mostly laboured to their total after a strong bowling performance on a pitch that had spent two days under covers due to the recent rain in Colombo.

There was a fair share of grass still on the top, but it was the amount of moisture, through sweating under the covers and the rainfall, which was the most noticeable aspect of the surface.

India’s batter Jemimah Rodrigues, who hit 32, noted at the interval that the ball was “stopping” in the surface.

Pratika Rawal (23) and Smriti Mandhana (31) gave India a solid, if slow, start in a 48-run partnership that came to an end off the last ball of the ninth over as the former was trapped lbw by Fatima Sana (2-39).

Harleen Deol appeared to be anchoring the innings with a fine 45, but holed out to long-on, handing Rameen Shamim (1-39) her only wicket and perhaps looking for a big shot to reach the milestone.

India’s total was their highest in ODI cricket without a batter reaching fifty. Richa Ghosh’s unbeaten 35 off 20 threatened to prevent that stat, and her strike rate left many baffled as to why the wicketkeeper-batter only came in at eight.

Seamer Diana Baig’s 4-69 was the pick of the bowlers for Pakistan, albeit at a high economy rate.

The innings was also elongated by 20 minutes when the players were asked to leave the field as a fumigator was brought in due to the number of flies affecting the play. To what extent the measure worked was arguable, as players continued to battle the bugs throughout.

The reply couldn’t have gotten off to a worse start for Pakistan, as they were reduced to 26-3 in the 12th over. The swing for Renuka Singh Thakur and Goud was proving near unplayable.

Thakur was unlucky to end her spell wicketless, partly due to dropped catches and the rest due to leg before wicket (LBW) decisions that didn’t go her way or were not reviewed by India’s captain Harmanpreet Kaur.

Sidra Amin and Natalia Pervaiz began the fightback with a partnership of 69 for the fourth wicket coming in 16 overs. The slow start was hurting Pakistan, and when Fatima – in at six – managed only 2 off 14 balls, India’s grip on the game tightened.

The fall of Amin’s wicket in the 40th over proved to be a fatal blow for Pakistan, who were then bowled out in the next three overs.

Pakistan’s captain Sana rued the missed run-out opportunities and misfields as she believed her team should have restricted India to a sub-200 total.

“In the start of the powerplay, we gave away a lot of runs,” she said after the match. “In the death overs, we also gave away some extra runs.”

India’s captain Kaur, meanwhile, was full of praise for her bowling attack.

“Kranti [Goud] was outstanding,” Kaur said in her post-match comments. “The spinners also helped to get breakthroughs. We created so many chances, but we dropped a few. In the end, we are happy.”

India travel back home for the remaining leg of their group matches and face South Africa on Thursday.

Pakistan will play their remaining games in Colombo, where they meet defending champions Australia on Wednesday.

Neither nation has ever won an ICC ODI or T20 World Cup.

Who: Pakistan vs Sri Lanka
What: T20 Asia Cup 2025 Super Fours
When: Tuesday, September 23 at 6:30pm (14:30 GMT)
Where: Zayed Cricket Stadium, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE)
How to follow: Al Jazeera Sport will have live build-up from 11:00 GMT ahead of our comprehensive text commentary stream of the match.

Pakistan and Sri Lanka meet in their Super Fours match at the T20 Asia Cup 2025 knowing that a loss in Abu Dhabi could jeopardise their place in the tournament.

Both former champions have lost their opening games in the second phase of the regional competition, and the match on Tuesday will offer them a chance to revive their campaign for the final.

The top two teams from the round-robin style Super Fours will qualify for the final in Dubai on Sunday.

Bangladesh and India, the other Super Fours teams, each have two points on the board after their respective wins against Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

Six-time winners Sri Lanka were edged by the Tigers by four wickets in a closely fought match on Saturday, while Pakistan were handed a second defeat in eight days at the hands of India on Sunday.

Charith Asalanka’s team were unbeaten in Group B and will start as favourites against Pakistan, whom they have beaten in their last five T20 international (T20I) meetings.

For two-time champions Pakistan, the match will offer a chance to restore some pride after their two heavy losses against archrivals India.

Players to watch: Pakistan

• Fakhar Zaman: The veteran batter has made a return to the team after a long, injury-forced layoff. And while he hasn’t posted big scores on a consistent basis, Zaman is known to demoralise opposition bowlers once he gets in the flow. The longer the opener stays at the crease, the better Pakistan’s chances of posting a big target or chasing one down.
• Abrar Ahmed: The bespectacled leg-spinner has been Pakistan’s most economical bowler in the tournament despite picking up only four wickets in his four Asia Cup games so far. His tight spells often force opposition batters to attack the other bowlers and lose wickets at the other end, making Abrar a key figure in Pakistan’s lineup.

Players to watch: Sri Lanka

• Pathum Nissanka: The Sri Lankan opener is enjoying an exceptional run of form and has scored a minimum of 30 runs in 16 of his last 25 innings in T20Is at a strike rate of 124. At the Asia Cup 2025, Nissanka is second on the run-scoring charts with 146 runs in four matches, 27 runs behind India’s exceptional batter Abhishek Sharma.
• Wanindu Hasaranga: Hasaranga’s place in the Sri Lankan side has been blighted by frequent injuries, but the leg-spin bowling all-rounder remains a key member of the team. He has taken five wickets in five Asia Cup 2025 matches at an economy rate of under six. Hasaranga enjoys playing against Pakistan and has taken 14 wickets and scored 61 runs in his five matches against the 2012 Asian champions.

Super Fours points table and qualification scenario

India sit on top of the Super Fours table with two points and a net run rate (NRR) of 0.689, followed by Bangladesh, who have the same number of points but an NRR of 0.121.

The winner of Tuesday’s match could rank anywhere from first to third, based on their NRR, and the losing team, while still not out, must win their last match by a big margin and hope the other results go their way.

Points Table 📊

The Super 4️⃣s are off to a thrilling start, with 🇮🇳 & 🇧🇩 recording important wins in their respective rivalry clashes and occupy top spots.#DPWorldAsiaCup2025 #ACC pic.twitter.com/eRw9yRHzco

— AsianCricketCouncil (@ACCMedia1) September 22, 2025

Head-to-head: Pakistan vs Sri Lanka in T20Is

While Pakistan lead Sri Lanka in their overall T20I results, the Lions have been the dominant team in the format in the past six years.

Pakistan have beaten Sri Lanka 13 out of 23 times, but their last T20I win against the Lions came in 2019.

Form guide: Pakistan

Pakistan have blown hot and cold in the T20 Asia Cup, having won against lower-ranked teams Oman and the UAE while losing both their matches against defending champions India.

As always, it is difficult to predict which Pakistan team – hot or cold – will turn up on match day.

Last five results (most recent first): L W L W W

Form guide: Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka beat all three of their Group B opponents prior to the Super Fours loss against Bangladesh, but have had a mixed bag of results in T20Is in 2025. They beat Zimbabwe 2-1 in their bilateral series but lost 2-1 to Bangladesh a few weeks earlier.

Last five results (most recent first): L W W W W

Team news: Pakistan

Pakistan have, predictably, made a few changes to their playing XIs over the course of the tournament, and not all of them have paid off.

Belligerent batter Hasan Nawaz’s exclusion from the team that faced India on Sunday was met with criticism, especially as the player replacing him – Hussain Talat – did not improve on Nawaz’s performances.

Salman Agha’s team have also switched between playing two spinners and pace bowlers.

Nawaz and spinner Sufiyan Muqeem could return against Sri Lanka.

Predicted XI: Sahibzada Farhan, Fakhar Zaman, Saim Ayub, Salman Agha (captain), Mohammad Haris (wicketkeeper), Hasan Nawaz/Hussain Talat, Faheem Ashraf, Mohammad Nawaz, Shaheen Shah Afridi/Haris Rauf, Abrar Ahmed, Sufiyan Muqeem

Team news: Sri Lanka

Lower-order batter Kamil Mishara’s spot in the playing XI will be under scrutiny, given his low strike rate and scores in the last three matches. Janith Liyanage could replace Mishara on Tuesday.

Predicted XI: Pathum Nissanka, Kusal Mendis (wicketkeeper), Kamil Mishara/Janith Liyanage, Kusal Perera, Charith Asalanka (captain), Dasun Shanaka, Kamindu Mendis, Wanindu Hasaranga, Dunith Wellalage, Dushmantha Chameera, Nuwan Thushara

Vladimir Putin is on a roll the past few weeks. First President Trump invited him to Anchorage. Then he got a three-way hug with China’s President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at a summit in China. And an invitation to a grand military parade in Beijing.

Since the 2014 annexation of Crimea, Putin had been shunted to the fringes of summit group photos. After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, he had been treated as a pariah by the United States and Europe. Indicted by the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide, he could travel only to countries that wouldn’t arrest him. In short, Moscow was not being treated with the respect it believed it deserved.

Trump thought that by literally rolling out the red carpet for Putin in Alaska — and clapping as the Russian loped down the red carpet — he could reset the bilateral relationship. And it did. But not the way Trump intended.

The Alaskan summit convinced the Russians that the current administration is willing to throw the sources of American global power out the window.

Trade partners, geopolitical allies and alliances — everything is on the table for Trump. The U.S. president believes this shows his power; the Russians see this as a low-cost opportunity to degrade American influence. Putin was trained by the KGB to recognize weakness and exploit it.

There is no evidence that being friendly to Putin and agreeing with Russian positions are going to make Moscow more willing to stop fighting in Ukraine. Overlooking Russia’s intensifying hybrid attacks on Europe, in February, Vice President JD Vance warned Europe that it should be focusing instead on the threat to democracy “from within.” This followed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth‘s assurances that Ukraine would never join NATO. Trump has suggested that U.S. support for NATO and Europe is contingent on those countries paying up. In an event that sent Moscow pundits to pop the Champagne, Trump told Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office that he just didn’t “have the cards” and should stop trying to beat Russia.

Did any of this bring Putin to the negotiating table? No.

In fact, the Kremlin indicated a readiness to talk with Trump about the war only when Trump threatened “very, very powerful” sanctions in mid-July. This time, he seemed serious about it. The Alaska summit happened a month later. The tougher Trump is with Russia, the more likely he is to get any kind of traction in negotiations. It’s unfortunate that the president has now gone back to vague two-week deadlines for imposing sanctions that never materialize.

Russia believes it will win the war. China has been a steady friend, willing to sell Russia cars and dual-use technology that ends up in drones that are attacking Ukrainian cities. It has also become Russia’s largest buyer of crude oil and coal. Western sanctions have not been biting the Russian economy, though they have nibbled away at state revenues. Europe and the United States have not been willing to apply the kind of economic pressure that would seriously dent Russia’s ability to carry on the war.

Putin keeps saying that a resolution to the war requires that the West address the “root causes” of the war. These causes, for Russia, relate to the way it was treated after losing the Cold War. The three Baltic nations joined Europe as fast as they could. Central and Eastern European countries decided that they would rather be part of NATO than the Warsaw Pact. When Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine started asking for membership in the European Union and NATO, Russia realized it wouldn’t be able to convince them to stay with economic appeal or soft power. It had to use force. Unable to demonstrate the attraction of its suffocating embrace, or the value of its Eurasian Economic Union, Russia believed it had to use force to keep Ukraine by its side. It reminds one of a grotesque Russian expression: “If he beats you, it means he loves you.”

The real “root cause” of the war in Ukraine is Russia’s inability to accept that centuries of empire do not confer the right to dominate former colonies forever. Mongolia learned this. As did the British. And the French. And the Ottomans. The Austro-Hungarians.

Eventually this war will end. But not soon. Russia is insisting on maximalist demands that Ukraine cannot agree to, which include control over territory it hasn’t managed to occupy. Ukraine will not stop fighting until it is sure that Russia will not attack again. Achieving that degree of certainty with flimsy security guarantees is impossible.

In the meantime, Ukrainian cities on the frontline will continue being wiped out, citizens in Kherson will continue being subjects of “human safari” for Russian drone operators, people across Ukraine will continue experiencing daily air raids that send them scurrying into shelters. Soldiers, volunteers, civilians and children will continue dying. Trump appears to care about the thousands of daily casualties. Most of these are Russian soldiers who have been sent to their death by a Russian state that doesn’t see their lives as worth preserving.

Trump is understandably frustrated with his inability to “stop the killing” because he has assumed that satisfying Russian demands is the answer. The opposite is true: Only by showing — proving — to Russia that its demands are unattainable will the U.S. persuade the Kremlin to consider meaningful negotiations. Countries at war come to the negotiating table not because they are convinced to abandon their objectives. They sit down when they realize their goals are unattainable.

Alexandra Vacroux is the vice president for strategic engagement at the Kyiv School of Economics.

In Trieste and the Meaning of Nowhere, travel writer Jan Morris described the city’s many faces and “ambivalence”, maintaining that, unlike most other Italian cities, it has “no unmistakable cuisine”. But I had come to Trieste to experience, if not a cuisine, then a culinary tradition which, to me at least, does seem unmistakable: the osmiza scene of the surrounding countryside.

An osmiza (or osmize in the plural) is a Slovene term for a smallholding that produces wine in the Karst Plateau, a steep rocky ridge scattered with pine and a patchwork of vineyards that overlooks the Adriatic Sea. Visiting osmize is a centuries-old tradition in which these homesteads open their doors to the public for a fleeting period each year. Guests order their food and wine at a till inside – where a simply tiled bar, often set into local stone, might boast family photos, halogen lights and a chalkboard menu – before heading outside to feast at long Oktoberfest-style tables and benches.

“On the Italian side of the border, we just serve cold food,” Jacob Zidarich tells us, as he places down plates of pickled courgette, house-cured salumi, local cow’s milk cheese and a homemade sausage with mustard and grated horseradish. “But in Slovenia, you find cooked food.”

I am sitting with my partner on the hot terrace at Zidarich’s family home, looking out over a glittering Adriatic. To accompany our food, Zidarich pours two glasses of liquid gold vitovska, a white wine indigenous to this corner of Friuli-Venezia-Giulia, the north-eastern Italian region that borders Slovenia, and which is home to the port city of Trieste.

To understand the tradition of visiting osmize is to grasp something of Trieste’s complex history and multifaceted cultural identity. The word derives from the Slovenian osem, meaning “eight”, a reference to a decree by 18th-century Holy Roman empress Maria Theresa that farmers in the Karst could sell their wares for eight consecutive days each year.

The result is an enduring tradition in which farmers only open for a short time each season, although almost all of them are now open for more than eight days a year. For this reason, no two osmiza-based itineraries are the same. Turn up at virtually any time of year and there will be osmize open – especially over the warmer months – all offering an affordable flavour of the Friulian countryside.

You’ll pay little more than €2-3 for a quarter-litre carafe of wine and €12-15 for an abundant platter of cold cuts, pickles and pillowy white bread. The tradition is particular to this tiny nook of Friuli, although as Zidarich indicated, it also exists – with differences – over the Slovenian border. Our focus is the Italian side where you can check which osmize are open (on the day of writing, there are 13) and at what time on the website osmize.com.

I base myself at the charming Hotel Albero Nascosto in the centre of Trieste for three nights and, with the intention of visiting as many of the osmize as possible, hire a car. I make it to four osmize, and realise quickly that Zidarich is something of an exception. Although his family had been making simple white and red wines for generations, it was his father, Benjamin, who transformed the farm into one of the most respected wine producers in the region. At other osmize we mostly drink wine from kegs. Some might describe these places as rustic, but even the table wines here have a clear style and moreish complexity to them.

Next up is Verginella Dean, an osmiza bustling with both locals and visitors and known for its peerless view of the Gulf of Trieste. From here the city’s Piazza Unità d’Italia is just visible, as is the brutalist Temple of Monte Grisa (which we visit afterwards). From an outdoor bar with two wine taps, I order a quarter of malvasia for two of us and a mixed platter of pork cuts, triangles of salty cheese and sun-dried tomatoes “for one” (it could feed four).

Osmize aren’t so much a cuisine as a gastronomic tradition, but I might have put to Jan Morris that they are emblematic of a place that, although bureaucratically Italian, has strong Slovenian influences. Zidarich’s vineyards straddle the border with most of the land being in Italy, but Slovenian is the language spoken at home, as with all the farmers I met.

“We don’t feel Italian here, we feel like we’re from Trieste,” says Theresa Sandalj, who owns a green coffee import business based in the city. The daughter of Trieste Slovenians, she tells me she grew up without any Italian traditions – “no lasagne, no ravioli” – and that when she met her Milanese husband she gave him a copy of Morris’s book “to explain what I was”.

Trieste, then, is at a crossroads between three great European cultures: Roman, Slavic and Austrian. But it doesn’t stop there – it’s a multi-faith, “inter-racial jumble”, as Morris had it, home to one of the largest synagogues in Europe alongside Greek and Serbian Orthodox churches. Its significant immigrant communities rub shoulders.

Besides osmize, there are plenty of reasons for hungry travellers to visit Trieste, from its quirky coffee culture complete with its own vocabulary (here an espresso is a nero, which could refer to a glass of red wine elsewhere in the region) to fresh fish and seafood at restaurants such as Trattoria Nerodiseppia and Le Barettine, which are both within spitting distance of the hotel.

We also loved Mimì e Cocotte, a centrally located seasonal restaurant that combines the humility of home-cooked food with a sense of occasion, and specialises in regional natural wines. With these we wash down courgette frittata and two plates of pasta – cacio e pepe, and cavatelli with tomatoes and stracciatella. Just outside Trieste, in the seaside village of Duino, Alla Dama Bianca has the fading charm of a 1970s hotspot. Here we eat razor clams and watch swans glide across the water as the sun sets.

Back in Trieste, on Via Giusto Muratti, we discover Pagna, an artisanal bakery and natural wine bar run by the Serbian pastry chef Pedja Kostic, who was drawn to Trieste from Belgrade via the US, by the wine scene. At Pagna I eat the almond croissant of my life: a perfect crisp pastry with a pillowy interior hugging not-too-much frangipane.

But it was for osmize that I came, where each one reflects the people behind it. At Šuc Erika, an osmiza in the middle of a farmyard, whose walls are adorned with a picture depicting ricotta production and felt-tip drawings by previous child guests, we order from a woman in a Metallica T-shirt. Afterwards, we sit under a pergola of ripening grapes. Rather magically, we are the only ones here, and sip our drinks (which, unusually, include a delicious cloudy beer brewed in-house) to a soundtrack of cattle lowing and stamping their hooves.

Unable to resist just one more before we leave, we head to Osmiza Boris in Medeazza, where Boris’s wife, Patricia, is behind the bar. She tells us about the salumi, wine vinegars, olive oil and honey they make on-site, while two teenage sons pad in and out of a courtyard in flip-flops. Boris was recommended to us by a waiter at La Dama Bianca as one of his favourites to visit before work, which gives you some indication of how widely enjoyed osmize are here – democratic and available to everybody, when they happen to be open.

The trip was provided by Promo Turismo FVG, the tourist board of Friuli-Venezia-Giulia. Doubles at Hotel Albero Nascosto from £120 B&B

Sept. 3 (UPI) — Five Republicans in the House joined Democrats Wednesday to block an effort to censure Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., over a confrontation with immigration officers in her district.

Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., sponsored a resolution that would have condemned McIver’s actions in May and removed her from her position on the House Homeland Security Committee. The House voted 215-207 to table the measure, with Republican Reps. Don Bacon and Mike Flood of Nebraska, Dave Joyce and Mike Turner of Ohio, and David Valadao of California voting against the censure along with all Democrats. Rep. Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y., and Rep. Nathaniel Moran, R-Texas, voted present.

Turner’s representative said he mistakenly voted against the resolution, which would not have changed the outcome of the vote, Politico reported.

McIver faces three federal charges for allegedly assaulting and interfering with immigration officers outside the Delaney Hall Federal Immigration Facility in Newark, N.J., during a congressional visit on May 9. U.S. Attorney Alina Habra said McIver forcibly grabbed and slammed an agent with her forearm and struck a second agent.

The counts carry up to eight years in prison if she’s convicted. She pleaded not guilty to the charges during her arraignment in June.

Along with McIver at the oversight inspection were Newark Mayor Ray Baraka, and Democratic Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman and Rob Menendez of New Jersey. Authorities initially arrested Baraka but later dropped the charges against him.

Democrats have called the charges and censure politically motivated. McIver’s lawyers said she didn’t commit any crimes and was simply carrying out her duties as a member of Congress attempting to inspect the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement facility, but federal agents reacted recklessly and disproportionately.

Garbarino said he voted no on the censure because he believes the Ethics Committee should review the matter. Bacon agreed.

“I don’t support the censure of Rep. LaMonica McIver because I want the Ethics Committee to finish their report on this matter,” he said.

Higgins said McIver was to blame for him pushing the vote, according to Roll Call.

“Had she withdrawn from the Homeland Security Committee, I certainly wouldn’t have offered a resolution, even though censure [is] legitimate and called for,” he said.

Southern Brave finished fourth in The Hundred with a four-run win over bottom side Welsh Fire in Southampton.

Chasing 168, Tom Kohler-Cadmore scored 84 from 46 balls, the third-highest score in this season’s competition, but was dismissed on the 98th ball of the innings as Fire fell just short.

Jason Roy powered Brave’s innings, striking 70 from 39 deliveries as the home side closed on 167-7, before Craig Overton had Fire openers Stephen Eskinazi and Steve Smith caught inside the first five balls of the chase.

Kohler-Cadmore, who struck seven sixes and three fours, dragged his side back into contention, putting on an 81-run fifth-wicket partnership with Ben Kellaway.

He cleared the ropes off Jordan Thompson to put his side in the box seat needing seven from three balls, but was bowled from the following delivery.

The Brave all-rounder only conceded singles from his remaining deliveries to close out the match.

The result means both Welsh Fire sides finish bottom of their respective standings, after the women’s side lost to the same opponents earlier in the day.

In the group stage’s final match, Brave lost openers Toby Albert and James Vince in the space of four balls after being put into bat, and saw James Coles bowled by Kellaway for seven to leave them 34-3 shortly after the powerplay.

However, Roy, who twice hit back-to-back sixes in an innings full of powerful strokeplay, put on partnerships of 55 with Leus du Plooy and 38 with Laurie Evans to push Brave towards a strong total.

Roy and Evans fell along with Michael Bracewell for the cost of just two runs as Brave wobbled, but Jordan Thompson and Craig Overton added 38 from the last 18 balls of the innings, runs that would prove decisive.

Last year, the party committed to widen public access to major sporting events by ensuring more are available to view without subscription TV packages. It says it favours a similar approach to one taken in Spain where La Liga must offer one free game a week to fans after a change in the law in 2022.

Max Wilkinson MP, Lib Dem spokesperson for Culture, Media and Sport said: “I’m urging MPs of all stripes to back our amendment to tear down the paywall and make Premier League games available on free to air channels.

“For too long, the jewel in the crown of British football has been locked behind an expensive barrier that keeps fans out while lining the pockets of broadcasters.

“That must end today – with a free-to-air revolution that gives the Premier League back to the country.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport said: “The government has no plans to review the listed events regime.”

The Premier League declined to comment.

The legislation has now reached the report stage in the House of Commons.

A similar amendment was tabled at the committee stage last month.

At the time, the Sports Minister Stephanie Peacock said: “The listed events regime have protected key moments such as the FA Cup Final while ensuring that the Premier League, EFL & FA are able to raise billions of pounds annually, which is invested back into the pyramid.

“We all want to see more matches being televised free-to-air, but that must be balanced against that investment and not risk it… It would not be appropriate for the regulator to intervene in commercial decisions between the relevant broadcasters and rights holders.”

The Lib Dems claim analysis of subscription prices shows that to watch each available Premier League game live next season fans will have to pay £660 a year.

Last month, it was revealed Premier League television viewing figures on main live rights-holder Sky Sports were down 10% last season, while TNT Sports had a 17% reduction in its year-on-year figures.

What a difference eight years makes. During President Trump’s first term, then-Sen. Marco Rubio pushed the president to expand his human rights diplomatic agenda. Rubio recognized that promoting human rights abroad is in the national interest. He urged the president to appoint an assistant secretary for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor — commonly known as DRL — after the position was left vacant for nearly two years. He co-sponsored the Women, Peace and Security Act (ensuring that the U.S. includes women in international conflict negotiations), spoke out against the torture of gay men in Chechnya and co-sponsored the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.

So it is shocking that as secretary of State, Rubio is overseeing the near-total destruction of his department’s human rights and global justice policy shops and programs. Rubio knows this decision, one catastrophe among the many State Department cuts he’s contemplating, will undermine the enforcement of legislation he previously championed. It will also imperil decades of bipartisan foreign policy and leave the world a much more dangerous and unjust place. Congress must use its authorization and appropriation powers to protect this work.

We speak from experience. We represent the Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice, an organization of former State Department senior diplomats mandated to promote human rights and criminal justice globally, and to combat human trafficking. If the proposed DRL “reorganization” proceeds, critical infrastructure and expertise, which took decades and enormous political will to build, will be lost. It would also send a chilling message to the world, and to Americans: The U.S. no longer sees the quests for equality, global justice or human rights as foreign policy imperatives, or as priorities at all.

Rubio’s plan would shutter most of the State Department’s offices devoted to human rights and lay off an estimated 80% of the DRL staff, most of whom are experts in human rights and democracy. In a recent Substack post, he claimed these civil servants had become “left-wing activists [waging] vendettas against ‘anti-woke’ leaders.” Surely he knows they have instead proved themselves committed to serve the U.S. government under whatever administration is elected.

Rubio may claim that he is not eliminating DRL, but by stripping it of all policy functions, limiting it to dispensing minimal humanitarian assistance and undermining its ability to influence policy debates, his plan will be the last nail in the coffin in which the Trump administration buries America’s human rights work.

When difficult foreign policy debates are underway at the highest levels, there will be no U.S. experts at the table who specialize in human rights issues. Yet we know it is crucial that America’s foreign policy decisions balance the often precarious tension between human rights and economic and geopolitical issues.

The destruction of DRL means many important initiatives will cease altogether. As one example, the bureau previously funded a global network of civil society organizations working to reintegrate detained children of Islamic State insurgents in Iraq. Without intervention, these children and their mothers (often victims themselves) would have been indefinitely trapped in refugee camps and left susceptible to radicalization and terrorist recruitment. This lifesaving work — which made Americans safer by disrupting the cycle of anti-American extremism — was done at minimal cost to U.S. taxpayers. Now this meticulously crafted network will probably disintegrate, empowering hostile regimes overnight and imperiling the victims of Islamic extremism.

Per the plan, the few surviving DRL offices would be rebranded along ideological lines. The Office of International Labor Affairs would become the Office of Free Markets and Fair Labor, allegedly to prioritize American workers. But a different message is clear: The State Department is eviscerating efforts to prevent human trafficking, forced labor and union-busting overseas, despite the fact that such practices only make it harder for America’s workers and manufacturers to compete in a global economy.

Trump’s foreign policy perversely twists human rights causes into their regressive opposites. For instance, Rubio plans to cancel the role of special representative for racial equity and justice created by the Biden administration — a long-overdue position given the destabilizing role of racial injustice in countries around the world (including our own). Now the department touts racist narratives about “civilizational allies” and asserts that human rights derive from “western values.”

That assertion is offensive, dangerous and wrong. For starters, the flagship human rights instrument is the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Labeling human rights “western” only encourages dictators around the world to falsely claim the efforts are a Trojan horse for American imperialism. Such framing may put a target on the backs of activists in repressive regimes where advocating for the most marginalized — LGBTQ+ people for example — can be a death sentence.

The Rubio overhaul of the State Department may not seem as alarming as the administration’s scorched-earth tactics elsewhere, such as the total elimination of the U.S. Agency for International Development. But his plan — and his weak and unsubstantiated justification for it — should raise alarms because foreign policy mirrors domestic policy and vice versa. Indeed, we fear that America’s retreat from human rights and democracy on the global stage is a preview for more repression to come here at home.

Congress will have to decide whether to approve Secretary Rubio’s dismantling of offices that fight for human rights and justice, a plan Sen. Rubio would have strenuously rejected less than a year ago. As the U.S. confronts emboldened adversaries, rising authoritarianism and increasing instability in the Middle East and elsewhere, senators and representatives would do well to remember that nations that promote and protect human rights and the rule of law are more likely to enjoy peace, prosperity and stability — conditions that used to define the U.S. to the rest of the world and that we need now more than ever.

Desirée Cormier Smith is the former State Department special representative for racial equity and justice. Kelly M. Fay Rodríguez is the former special representative for international labor affairs, and Beth Van Schaack the former ambassador for global criminal justice. The full list of founders of the Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice is available at thealliancefordiplomacyandjustice.org.

In the beginning there was chaos.

Three years ago, FX’s “The Bear” splattered across our screens and made it impossible to look away. The yelling; the cursing; the gravy-slopping, bowl-clattering, grease-slick, jerry-rigged anxious sweaty mess of the Chicago sandwich shop the Beef and the wildly dysfunctional group of people who worked there, including elite chef Carmy Berzatto (Jeremy Allen White), who inherited the Beef from his dead-by-suicide beloved brother Mikey (Jon Bernthal), wowed critics and raised the culture’s collective cortisol count to eye-twitching levels.

Critics used terms like “stress bomb” and “adrenaline shot”; current and former restaurant workers described symptoms not unlike those of PTSD, and viewers ate it all up with a spoon.

Season 2, in which Carmy follows through on his plan to turn the Beef into a fine-dining establishment, only increased the anxiety level. With real money on the table (courtesy of Carmy’s uncle Jimmy, played by Oliver Platt), along with the hopes, dreams and professional futures of the staff, including Sydney (Ayo Edebiri), Marcus (Lionel Boyce), Tina (Liza Colón-Zayas), Sugar (Abby Elliott) and, of course, Cousin Richie (Ebon Moss-Bachrach), stakes were cranked to do-or-die.

When the episode “Fishes,” a stomach-clenching holiday buffet of trauma, revealed the twisted roots of a family forged by alcoholism — Carmy’s mother Donna (Jamie Lee Curtis) — and abandonment — Carmy’s father — viewers could not get enough.

This being television, we knew that all the wild dysfunction would inevitably coalesce into triumph — you cannot achieve greatness without driving yourself and everyone else crazy first, right? When, at the end of Season 2, the Bear somehow managed to have a successful opening night, despite Carmy locking himself in a refrigerator and having a full-on existential crisis, our deep attachment to “yes chef” pandemonium appeared vindicated. Fistfuls of Emmys and dopamine cocktails all around.

Except being able to open is a rather low bar for success, even in the restaurant business. Carmy is, for all his talent, an utter mess, and creator Christopher Storer is not, as it turns out, interested in celebrating the time-honored, and frankly toxic, notion that madness is a necessary part of genius — to the apparent dismay of many viewers.

When, in Season 3, Storer and his writers opted to slow things down a bit, to pull each character aside and unsnarl the welter of emotions that fueled the Bear’s kitchen, some viewers were disappointed. Which, having become dependent on the show’s stress-bomb energy, they expressed with outrage. “The Bear” had lost its edge, was getting dull, boring, repetitive and reliant on stunt-casting; it should have ended with Season 2 or, better yet, become a movie.

Thus far, the reaction to Season 4 has run the gamut — where some condemn what they consider continuing stagnation, others cheer a return to form. Which is kind of hilarious as this opens with the staff of the Bear reeling from an equally mixed review of the restaurant from the Chicago Tribune. (Shout out to the notion that a newspaper review still has make-or-break influence, though the Bear’s lack of a social media awareness has long been worrisome).

Season 4 of “The Bear” starts with the restaurant’s crew reaction to the Chicago Tribune review and how it will affect the restaurant. “They didn’t like the chaos,” Sydney says.

(FX)

Turns out that Carmy’s obsessive determination to change the menu daily, and keep his staff on perpetual tenterhooks, was perceived as disruptive, but not in a good way.

“They didn’t like the vibe,” he tells Syd in a morning-after debrief. “They didn’t like the chaos,” she replies. “You think I like chaos?” he asks. “I think you think you need it to be talented,” she says, adding, “You would be just as good, you would be great … without this need for, like, mess.”

Coming early in Episode 1, Syd’s message is a bit on the nose, but addiction does not respond to subtlety, and “The Bear” is, as I have written before, all about the perils and long-range damage of addiction. That includes Donna’s to alcohol, Mikey’s to painkillers, Carmy’s to a self-flagellating notion of perfection and, perhaps, the modern TV audience’s to cortisol.

As Season 4 plays out, with its emphasis on introspection and real connection, viewers might consider why “addictive” has become the highest form of compliment in television.

It’s such a sneaky bastard, addiction, happy to hijack your brain chemistry in any way it can. Our collective attention span isn’t what it used to be and the adrenaline rush unleashed by crisis, real or observed, can create a desire to keep replicating it. Even on broadcast and cable television, most dysfunctional family series take a one-step-forward-two-steps-back approach to their characters’ emotional growth. The mess is what viewers come for, after all.

Particularly in comedy, we want to see our characters get into jams for the pleasure of watching them wildly flail about trying to get out of them. Early seasons of “The Bear” took that desire to a whole new level.

But having amped up the craziness and the stakes, Storer now appears to be more interested in exploring why so many people believe that an ever-roiling crucible is necessary to achieve greatness. And he is willing to dismantle some of the very things that made his show a big hit to do it.

Frankly, that’s as edgy as it gets, especially in streaming, which increasingly uses episodic cliffhangers to speed up a series’ completion rate — nothing fuels a binge watch like a jacked up heart rate.

Like Carmy, Storer doesn’t appear content with resting on his laurels; he’s willing to take counterintuitive risks. As an attempt to actually show both the necessity and difficulty of recovery, in a micro- and meta- sense, “The Bear” is an experiment that defies comparison.

At the beginning of this season, Uncle Jimmy puts a literal clock on how long the Bear has before, short of a miracle, he will have to pull the plug. Carmy, still addicted to drama, claims they will still get a Michelin star, despite evidence to the contrary, which will solve everything. (Spoiler: A gun introduced in the first act must go off in the third is one of many tropes “The Bear” upends.)

The rest of the staff, mercifully, takes a more pragmatic approach. Richie, having become the unexpected sensei of the Bear (and the show), does the most sensible thing — he asks for help from the crackerjack staff of chef Terry’s (Olivia Colman) now defunct Ever. Watching chef Jessica (Sarah Ramos) whip the nightly schedule into shape only underlines the absurdity, and damage, of the auteur theory of anything — greatness is never a solitary achievement.

As Carmy loosens his grip, other outsiders pitch in — Luca (Will Poulter) shows up from Copenhagen to help Marcus and also winds up aiding Tina; Ebraheim (Edwin Lee Gibson) drafts an actual mentor (played by Rob Reiner) to help him figure out how he can grow the Beef sandwich window and Sweeps (Corey Hendrix) finds his own in another sommelier (played by retired master Alpana Singh).

Donna (Jaime Lee Curtis) apologizes to Carmy (Jeremy Allen White) for her actions and the harm she caused.

(FX)

Carmy, thank God, not only returns to Al Anon, but he finally visits his mother, which allows a now-sober Donna (in another potentially Emmy-winning performance by Curtis) to admit the harm she has done and try to make amends.

It is, inarguably, a very different show than the one that debuted three years ago, with far fewer cacophonous kitchen scenes, and many more Chicago-appreciating exteriors. When the long-awaited wedding of Richie’s ex, Tiffany (Gillian Jacobs), reunites many of the characters from the famous “Fishes” episode, fears about a gathering of Berzattos and Faks prove unfounded. Despite a high-pitched and hilarious spat between Sugar and her ex-bestie Francie Fak (Brie Larson), the event is, instead, a celebration of love and reconciliation and includes what passes for a group therapy session under the table where Richie’s daughter Eva (Annabelle Toomey) has hidden herself. (This scene, which involved all the main characters, was more than a little undermined by said table’s TARDIS-like ability to be “bigger on the inside” and the fact that it held the wedding cake, which did not fall as they all exited, is proof that “The Bear” is not a comedy.)

Not even the digital countdown could generate the sizzling, clanking, sniping roar of chronic, organic anxiety that fueled the first two seasons. And I’d be lying if I said I didn’t miss it — I love my adrenaline rush as much as the next person.

But that’s the whole point. Real change doesn’t occur with the speed or the electricity of a lightning bolt; as many addicts discover, it’s about progress, not perfection. Recovery takes time and often feels weird — if you want to have a different sort of life, you need to do things differently.

That’s tough on a hit TV show, as the reactions to Season 3 proved (we’ll see how it fares when Emmy nominations are announced in a few weeks). Few series have made as large a shift in tone and tempo as “The Bear,” but its intentions are clear. To illuminate the necessity, and difficulty, of breaking an addiction to anything, including chaos, you can’t rely on talk; for your life to be different, you have to do things differently.

B&M shoppers are snapping up a dupe of The White Company’s iconic table lamp – priced nearly £100 less.

The lamp features a sleek white concrete base with a large matching shade and sells for just £20 at the popular British discount retailer.

4

4

4

The White Company’s Clayton Table Lamp, currently priced at £110, has been popular for its minimalist design.

The upmarket home brand advertises the lamp as a versatile piece made from natural linen, ideal for bedside tables, consoles and sideboards.

B&M claims to offer a knockoff of the sought-after lamp.

The discount chain shared a video on social media promoting its own white lamp, with on-screen text that reads, “White Company who?” and “£20 base & shade”.

The post drew comments from shoppers tempted by the bargains displayed in the video.

One user wrote: “I’ve got to stop looking at these posts, too much temptation.”

Meanwhile, B&M shoppers can buy a three-person tent for just a fraction of the cost of the North Face equivalent.

B&M is selling the Outdoor Adventure 2-3 Person Camping Tent for £18.

North Face’s Stormbreak 2-Person Tent is currently available for a total of £225.

Offering a similar capacity, the more expensive model is described as water-resistant, breathable and lightweight.

B&M shoppers have also recently spotted a chair originally priced at £100 now selling for just £30.

The Louise chair, available in cream and green, measures 58cm wide, 72cm high and 68cm deep, and supports up to around 100kg.

Meanwhile, a garden gadget is available for just £1 at B&M.

The Modern Solar Table Lamp has been further reduced to £1, down from £1.50.

The lamp is 21cm tall and has a rechargeable battery, making it an affordable way to light up an outdoor space on summer nights.

It emits a soft, warm white LED light.

4

NOTTINGHAM FOREST would have earned a Champions League spot at the expense of Newcastle if VAR did not exist.

And the Magpies’ escape from any consequences for their home defeat by Everton is put into even starker content as they would have missed out on European football altogether without the technology.

3

3

SunSport have analysed all 380 Prem matches this term and worked out how the table would have looked if the original on-field decisions had not been overturned after intervention by the Stockley Park video booth.

Our number crunchers found that Eddie Howe’s men were by far the biggest beneficiaries of VAR changes. 

Newcastle had a staggering 13 decisions changed in their favour, with just five reversals hurting them.

That brought a net figure of +8, with Aston Villa and West Ham next in the benefits column with each having four more interventions in their favour than against them.

Our analysis, which assumes every penalty that was initially awarded and then wiped was scored, suggests that without VAR Newcastle would have picked up four fewer points – dropping them to eighth in the table – and conceded seven more goals.

Forest, whose home defeat by Chelsea left them in the Conference League slot, would have finished fifth in our “No VAR” table.

And Bournemouth, ninth in the actual table, would have been preparing for a first continental campaign in the Europa League without the technology changes.

Andoni Iraola’s side had 11 VAR changes against them and just three in their favour, costing the Cherries EIGHT points and seven goals.

The study of the 111 changed decisions cannot determine definitively what would have happened in real life if the initial decisions had not been overturned.

But one of the most contentious calls saw Dango Ouattara’s last-gasp “winner” against Newcastle in August chalked off for a handball PGMOL chief Howard Webb subsequently conceded was wrongly overturned after the VAR intervention.

Over the course of the season there were 12 goals and 25 penalties awarded through VAR intervention – with 21 of those spot-kicks converted – compared to 48 goals and 11 penalties disallowed.

Liverpool’s 10-point advantage over Arsenal at the top of the pile would have been reduced to just two without VAR, as the Gunners lost eight points from the six overturns against them – including “winning” goals against Chelsea, Fulham and Aston Villa.

Chelsea and Manchester City swap places, with the Londoners up to third, with Villa down one to take the Conference League slot.

3