This thesis aims to identify and analyze the manner in which Prime Ministers Boris Johnson (UK) and Stefan Löfven (Sweden) frame the matter of the Covid outbreak in light of its second onset in 2020. By examining these two actors, we wish to contribute to the already existing literature on political leaders’ crisis rhetoric and to add content to the novel subject of pandemic rhetorics. By utilizing critical textual analysis and framing theory, this thesis identifies and examines themes and patterns of rhetorical structure surrounding the subject of Covid-19. The framing analysis is structured by three analytical points; problem definition, suggested causes and remedies, it will also be analyzed through the scope of integrative complexity theory. The three points will be assessed with measures that indicate in what manner the subject is framed; problem definition - positive or dire. Suggested causes - exogenous or endogenous. Remedies - restorative or reformative. The data for this study consists of 26 speeches made by the two political leaders, four from Löfven and 22 from Johnson. The results show that Stefan Löfven and Boris Johnson frame the outbreak through similar concepts, yet show difference in the variety and extent of integrative complexity; Löfven showing significantly higher levels through keeping a neutral and inclusive standpoint in the three variables, whereas Johnson maintains a more inclined approach with lower levels of integrative complexity by presenting less alternatives and variety in his framings.