The left’s response to President Trump has involved tearing up anything even remotely connected to him. From firebombing Teslas to ripping down Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center, the rule still stands: if the orange man touched it, they hate it. The most egregious example of this new left-wing phenomenon is the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, which Trump had renovated earlier this summer. After its completion, several arrests were made when people allegedly tore off chunks of American-flag-blue paint from the side of the pool. Clearly, those were acts of vandalism, but on Thursday’s The 11th Hour, MS NOW guest host Symone Sanders-Townsend somehow came to a different conclusion: the administration arrested those poor people for living ordinary lives. The Justice Department just charged three people, including former Olympic canoeist David Hearn, with misdemeanor destruction of property. According to Hearn’s charge, he allegedly caused about $1,000 worth of damage to the Reflecting Pool’s new coat of paint. But the arrests of Hearn and other accused vandals, according to Sanders-Townsend, had a “chilling effect,” because “any American can be arrested for just about anything."     Wrong. The police can’t arrest anyone for “just about anything.” They can only arrest if they have a reasonable suspicion that you committed a crime. Besides, in what world are people going about ripping paint off pool walls as part of their everyday routine? But, guest panelist and Syracuse University professor Nayyera Haq provided a slightly different reason for arrests and minor charges: Like, that's how low they are going to make - continue the story that D.C. is crime-ridden to also justify the National Guard still sitting here. You’d be hard-pressed to find someone who’s lived around D.C. over the past couple years who would say that the city hasn’t vastly improved since Trump began his second term. Crime is down, the Metro is rideable again, and the fountains flow graffiti-free. But the America-hating leftists and their media just can’t seem to appreciate the good things Trump does for the country. Co-panelist and legal analyst Ankush Khardori also added: So, every time we see, you know, these sort of piddly little misdemeanor charges, which will result in nothing, even if there's a conviction, maybe, I don't know, 50 bucks or something on - something like that. It may come as a surprise to Khardori, but not every crime prosecuted by the federal or state government has to be as big as diamond-heisting or murder. Even unpaid parking tickets can be prosecuted. It all goes back to the basic structure of the American government: the legislature passes laws, and the executive enforces them.  The Code of Federal Regulations classifies vandalism as “Destroying, injuring, defacing, or damaging property or real property,” and since the reflecting pool is federal property, the federal government has a clear basis to prosecute those arrested at the pool with this exact crime. They’re not going after these people just to “preserve the President’s vanity,” as Sanders-Townsend suggested. Crime is crime and should be prosecuted and punished according to U.S. law. But it’s not surprising to see the Democratic media, who have spent years defending criminals of all types, continue that streak as they gripe on about the reflecting pool. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: MS NOW's The 11th Hour 7/9/26 11:11:32 p.m. Eastern SYMONE SANDERS-TOWNSEND: Ankush, the Justice Department just charged three people today for misdemeanor destruction of property.  This was about, allegedly - and let me just read this, “removing peeling paint from the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool.”  This is the criminalization of, just, ordinary life, and also lies because the administration has yet to provide any evidence that the individuals that they charged actually peeled the paint from the reflecting pool.  But also, is this a crime? I don't understand. ANKUSH KHARDORI: Well, look, we'll find - you know, it's unclear to me that it's actually criminal conduct. It'll - it's going to depend on the facts.  To me, I think the striking thing is, remember, for weeks Trump was saying that there was a giant gash that had been put into the cover like 250, then it was 300, then 350 feet. And why have they not charged that case? My guess is, because nobody did that, and they're unable to substantiate those claims. And you notice he stopped talking about it.  So every time we see, you know, these sort of piddly little misdemeanor charges, which will result in nothing, even if there's a conviction, maybe, I don't know, 50 bucks or something on - something like that. SANDERS-TOWNSEND: But isn't the point that it's a chilling effect because now any American can - the message that I gleaned from it is that any American can be arrested for just about anything.  The government could make it up. They can try to cobble together some explanation, and you will have to pay, whether it's $50  or $100, five days in jail, or just your reputation. NAYYERA HAQ: Well, Jeanine Pirro went, had a huge press conference last week talking about the crime of vandalism at national monuments. And the person that she was like, case number one and criminal number one, was somebody who talked back to a park police officer.  Like, that's how low they are going to make - continue the story that DC is crime-ridden to also justify the National Guard still sitting here. KHARDORI: Remember, sometimes, and more frequently than should be the case in this administration, they flop on these cases.  Remember the sandwich guy? Jeanine Pirro did a whole big thing where she put out a video, says, “We're coming after you.” They couldn't get felony charges from the grand jury and they couldn't even convict him on a - on the misdemeanor counts.  So I don't know who these folks are, but I would not assume that they're going to be convicted based on what we've seen from this U.S. attorney's office.  And to your point, what seems to be a - an enforcement priority only to sort of preserve the President's vanity, right, because he's upset about the mess that he created at the reflecting pool.

So who will vet the vetters? Certainly not Matthew Yglesias who had an opinion piece in the New York Times less than a month ago, June 17, in which he enthuses so much over the one who supposedly vetted Graham Platner, Daniel Moraff (pictured), that it comes off as The Adoration of the Moraff as you can read in "The Democrats Need Better Candidates. This Guy Knows How to Find Them." Love is in the air as Yglesias merrily gushes over Moraff, the one whom many/most Democrats are furious at for perhaps ruining their chances of taking the Senate in the midterm elections. You’ve probably never heard of Daniel Moraff. He went to Brown and was excited by Senator Bernie Sanders’s 2016 presidential campaign and spent years as a local organizer in Pittsburgh and New York while involved with the Democratic Socialists of America. Today he’s emerging as a new force in politics specializing in populist outsiders. He discovered Dan Osborn and Graham Platner, showing a knack for finding unlikely politicians with real charisma and skills. As we now know, Mr. Platner also comes with a somewhat checkered past and real, potentially costly flaws. But Mr. Moraff, in contrast to his somewhat bombastic candidates, is quiet and unassuming in person and approaches his job like a casting director. He looks for a particular type: military veterans with blue-collar jobs and no electoral experience but an interest in politics and (typically) labor unions. You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out this guy absolutely does not take the task of vetting candidates seriously as you can tell by the following interview in which Giggles Moraff and his smirking companion laugh mockingly at the notion of conducting thorough background checks of candidates such as Platner. Daniel Moraff gives off a vibe of self-satisfied cleverness, a confidence that he is more clever than everyone else, and that his cleverness alone will be sufficient to avoid error. pic.twitter.com/DWoOotMfFQ — The Patriarch Tree (@PatriarchTree) July 8, 2026 Yglesias provided the inadvertent service of identifying other candidates Moraff hand-picked besides Platner such as Dan Osborn, who is running for the U.S. Senate from Nebraska supposedly as an independent (but really as a Democrat). Here are a couple more candidates that need to get a real vetting from professionals based on Moraff's underperformance of this task with Platner. Mr. Moraff himself is not a Democratic insider or a strategist. In the terms popular with the Silicon Valley types whom he doubtless hates, Mr. Moraff is “high agency.” He saw a void and moved into it. He doesn’t accept the view that good candidates need to have a traditional résumé, or that to be the guy behind the guy in a critical Senate race, you need to pay your dues by managing House campaigns or toiling for multiple cycles at the national party committees. Mr. Moraff is also working with House candidates like Brian Poindexter in Ohio and Nate Powell in Washington State, who are cut from a similar labor-populist ideological cloth. Attention Democrats! Possible vetting cleanup alerts for Ohio and Washington State based on the toxic legacy Moraff left behind in Maine with his personally picked Graham Platner.

MS NOW’s Connect host Jacob Soboroff rewound the clock on Saturday to promote a short documentary called Reclaim the Flag that was released a year ago that featured several LGBTQ celebrities—some of whom were definitely more famous than others—talking about their views of the flag. Soboroff sat down with producer Alexis Bittar to discuss the film and play several soundbites that included claims to the flag as having “blood on it” and being a “violent symbol of prejudice and hate” and beliefs that people who fly the flag would kill them if they had the opportunity. Soboroff kicked off the segment by declaring, “It is every country’s greatest and most visual and most recognized symbol. It is its flag. America's flag with the stars and stripes has been a symbol of freedom and unity and love of country since 1777. But over the years, our love for this country has been tested, especially for those who feel their own identity doesn't seem to love them back.”   Jacob Soboroff promotes a nearly one-year old documentary againt LGBTQ people and the flag "But over the years, our love for this country has been tested, especially for those who feel their own identity doesn't seem to love them back." After some clips, including of actress… pic.twitter.com/KbxyQnTHN1 — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 11, 2026   He then hyped “The short documentary Reclaim the Flag, produced by Oscar winner Bruce Cohen and directed by jewelry designer and filmmaker Alexis Bittar, explores this through the lens of the LGBTQ community. It features well-known members of the community dissecting their own relationship with our country’s flag.” The first montage showed actress Lena Waithe and actor Jim Parsons: WAITHE: Depending on how the United States feels about you will depend on how you feel about the flag. [jump cut] If you feel like your people have been killed, wronged, been able to be seen as less than human under the flag, you're going to be triggered by it, but yet still be born under it. PARSONS: I think that it's a very radical idea in today's climate to imagine going off, for a lot of people to die, for the unity of this country. How are we united? How are we united? What are we united about? WAITHE: The American flag has blood on it. And it's drenched in it. I think that we can accept that or act as if it isn't true, and we can't change what we don't face. Soboroff then returned to add, “This film doesn't end with a clear resolution, and that is the point. Some cautiously think about embracing the flag for the first time ever, or for the first time in a while, and others acknowledge the irony of being an American while also being marginalized by parts of their own country, and all seem to argue that something has got to give in order to take the flag back as a symbol of inclusivity.” Not every clip Soboroff showed was as outrageous as Waithe and Parsons, but he was clearly excited to show the ones that were. Later, during his sit-down with Bittar, he introduced another clip, “You know, what's crazy is that, correct me if I'm wrong, but Trump's name doesn't actually come up in the film, right?... but he does—I mean, he certainly looms over it, I think. And the moment that we live in is very palpable. I want to play another portion of the association that so many people in the LGBTQ community have with this flag and, and how it relates to the symbol of unity. Let's watch this.   Later, Soboroff claims Trump "certainly looms over it, I think. And the moment that we live in is very palpable. I want to play another portion of, of the association that so many people in the LGBTQ community have with this flag and, and how it relates to the symbol of unity.… pic.twitter.com/9cKgBs05iZ — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 11, 2026   The clip package featured more flag bashing: MARC JACOBS [fashion designer]: Why, when I see an American flag, do I think of, like, MAGA and right-wing? And why do I feel like it's a violent symbol of prejudice and hatred. CHRIS KLEMENS [comedian]: I see someone hanging an American flag and I'm like, ‘You would hit me with a car if you had the opportunity.’ MATT BERNSTEIN [content creator/make-up artist]: If I'm, you know, if I'm on Grindr, right? And I see an American flag emoji in someone's bio. I think that is a Republican. HUNTER CRENSHW [reality TV personality]: It's a negative thing to be, to see. And I and, you know, I've definitely had my fair share of talking [bleep] about it. But at the end of the day, there's something back here that still has a reverence. Soboroff reacted by wondering, “I saw that you said around the time that you were making this film and sitting with the people that are in it that some people are even nervous to talk about the country. Why do you think that is?” Bittar hinted that Trump had something to do with it, “We shot this in April of last year, and it was at a time when the government was really coming down on colleges, on institutions, about talking about America. So, I think everyone feels this kind of ominous threat of not wanting to be on the record or wanting attention to them, saying anything that's controversial about America. So it was difficult, actually, getting 50 people. We cast it in three weeks, so we had to get 50 people in three weeks to go on air and talk about it.” As it turns out, none of the people in the film ever faced any repercussions from the government. In a properly functioning media, Soboroff would have wondered if that undermined all the America-bashing, but that is not what MS NOW exists for. Here is a transcript for the July 11 show: MS NOW Connect with Jacob Soboroff 7/11/2026 12:46 PM ET JACOB SOBOROFF: It is every country’s greatest and most visual and most recognized symbol. It is its flag. America's flag with the stars and stripes has been a symbol of freedom and unity and love of country since 1777. But over the years, our love for this country has been tested, especially for those who feel their own identity doesn't seem to love them back.  The short documentary Reclaim the Flag, produced by Oscar winner Bruce Cohen and directed by jewelry designer and filmmaker Alexis Bittar, explores this through the lens of the LGBTQ community. It features well known members of the community dissecting their own relationship with our country’s flag. LENA WAITHE: Depending on how the United States feels about you will depend on how you feel about the flag. [jump cut] If you feel like your people have been killed, wronged, been able to be seen as less than human under the flag, you're going to be triggered by it, but yet still be born under it. JIM PARSONS: I think that it's a very radical idea in today's climate to imagine going off, for a lot of people to die, for the unity of this country. How are we united? How are we united? What are we united about? WAITHE: The American flag has blood on it. And it's drenched in it. I think that we can accept that or act as if it isn't true, and we can't change what we don't face. SOBOROFF: This film doesn't end with a clear resolution, and that is the point. Some cautiously think about embracing the flag for the first time ever, or for the first time in a while, and others acknowledge the irony of being an American while also being marginalized by parts of their own country, and all seem to argue that something has got to give in order to take the flag back as a symbol of inclusivity. … SOBOROFF: You know, what's crazy is that, correct me if I'm wrong, but Trump's name doesn't actually come up in the film, right? ALEXIS BITTAR: Yeah. SOBOROFF: Yeah. And, but he does—I mean, he certainly looms over it, I think. And the moment that we live in is very palpable. I want to play another portion of the association that so many people in the LGBTQ community have with this flag and, and how it relates to the symbol of unity. Let's watch this. MARC JACOBS: Why, when I see an American flag, do I think of, like, MAGA and right-wing? And why do I feel like it's a violent symbol of prejudice and hatred. CHRIS KLEMENS: I see someone hanging an American flag and I'm like, “You would hit me with a car if you had the opportunity.” MATT BERNSTEIN: If I'm, you know, if I'm on Grindr, right? And I see an American flag emoji in someone's bio. I think that is a Republican. HUNTER CRENSHW: It's a negative thing to be, to see. And I and, you know, I've definitely had my fair share of talking [bleep] about it. But at the end of the day, there's something back here that still has a reverence. SOBOROFF: I saw that you said around the time that you were making this film and sitting with the people that are in it that some people are even nervous to talk about the country. Why do you think that is? BITTAR: We shot this in April of last year, and it was at a time when the government was really coming down on colleges, on institutions, about talking about America. So, I think everyone feels this kind of ominous threat of not wanting to be on the record or wanting attention to them, saying anything that's controversial about America. So it was difficult, actually, getting 50 people. We cast it in three weeks, so we had to get 50 people— SOBOROFF: Wow. BITTAR: —in three weeks to go on air and talk about it.

What would taking apart the American government look like? The headline deck at Fox News read as follows:  Socialists launch radical platform to abolish the US Senate in bid to fundamentally transform America  The radical update also calls for amnesty for all immigrants and defunding the Department of War, sources say This jewel of a story reports:  “As many of its candidates notch electoral wins nationwide, the pre-eminent socialist political group in the U.S., the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), plans to roll out an updated platform that includes eliminating the Senate and replacing the president and the Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by Congress. According to a source familiar with the DSA’s planning, the organization plans to roll out an update next week to its long-term vision for a U.S. policy platform. The update includes eliminating the U.S. Senate and replacing the president and the Supreme Court with an executive branch and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress. Additionally, the updated platform would include amnesty for all immigrants and defunding the Department of War.” Well now. Democrats have plans afoot to eliminate the United States Senate? Replace the elected president and the Supreme Court “with an executive and judiciary chosen by Congress”? And oh yes. There was this: "the updated platform would include amnesty for all immigrants and defunding the Department of War.” Not to be too obvious, but with all of that -- essentially a story about turning the Republic that is the good ole USA into a socialist dictatorship -- one would think this news would be all over the place. With the entire American media both reporting this and then analyzing and critiquing a story that is essentially about those who want to dismantle American democracy. Haven't the media endlessly worried about democracy being dismantled by MAGA? For some strange reason, presented by Fox with some pretty hard facts on a seriously big story about a growing faction inside the "Democratic" party, the rest of the American media has gone quieter than the proverbial church mouse. Why? There can only be one of two reasons. Either the rest of the “mainstream” media doesn’t believe the story and chooses to ignore it. Or, in fact, they do believe the story and have some quiet agreement with the “Democratic Socialists” and their scheme to turn the American Republic upside down and inside out, reshaping America beyond recognition. Either way, the media ain’t looking so good as this story emerges.  There’s more in all this. The DSA touts itself as “a “working-class alternative to the Democratic Party.” It added:  "Our newly elected leaders will fight for the working class — not for crumbs." Hmmm. Not to put too fine a point on it, but in the long ago of 1980, the media was certain GOP nominee Ronald Reagan was going to lose to Democrat President Jimmy Carter because, you know, the GOP was the party of the country club types. The election arrived. And to their absolute shock, the media learned Reagan’s landslide had come about thanks to what was called “Reagan Democrats” -- working class folk who hung their working hard hats at places like Detroit auto workers’ union halls.  The bottom line? The American media is all too frequently wrapped up in lefty politics -- not reality. The left wing version of reality is that working class Americans are all natural lefties, or close to it. The GOP is supposedly the sniffy party of the Country Club.  Even all these years after the appearance of the “Reagan Democrats” the media is still caught up in the once-upon- a-time political myth that said Democrats were the party of the working class and, as noted, the Republicans were the party of the Country Club. Once upon a time political eons ago -- in the days of Democrat working class hero Franklin D. Roosevelt -- that worldview was true. But in fact, Democrats gradually sold out their party to the world of intellectual, highly educated elites. To short hand it? Democrats became the party of Harvard and Ivy League university types. And it lost them the votes of working class, union-belonging workers. That transition was made a long time ago. And it amuses to see left-wing elites lose sight of the fact that President Trump, he who worked his way to billionaire status, began as the son of working class Queens, New York. And without doubt, to this day, Trump carries himself and thinks as the son of working class Queens. Which is exactly why the President is so popular with working Americans. It is very safe to say that those parading around as Democratic Socialists of America are clueless about working-class Americans, certainly those who are enthusiastic Trump supporters. In fact, it is easy to suspect that the members of the DSA look down their noses at working-class Trump supporters - the union members, the auto workers, the plumbers, electricians and all the others who exist and work in the blue-collar world. This is irrelevant at this point. Donald Trump has been elected twice. Come January 20th of 2029, President Trump will be flown back to Mar-a-Lago or wherever else he chooses to go.  The question will be, and is already being increasingly asked: Will the media be doing a deep dive on just who is the President’s successor? Vice President Vance? Secretary of State Rubio? An unknown Other? And there’s the other question. Will “Trumpism” as it could be called -- go on? Will the page of history be turned as always, with new ideas and policies in place to move the country forward in new ways or old? And will the media zero in to analyze and report? The first indicator of this next chapter in American history will take place with the 2026 mid-term elections. And with the media trying to make sense of it all. And to close on a historical note? In 1964, Democrats swept to power with liberal Democrat President Lyndon Johnson clobbering conservative Republican Barry Goldwater. I was (ahem!) a geeky kid reading the political news in the day. And I well remember the various media stories of the day that thought the GOP had met its end.  Yet a mere two years later in 1966, Republicans had a massive mid-term election win. And one of the conservative GOP leaders who appeared seemingly out of the blue - to the astonishment of the day’s media - was a supposed “B actor” named Ronald Reagan who won a landslide election as Governor of California.  And as they say, history records the rest of that story. Buckle in. Trump supporters and conservatives are on the march. Memo to the media? Try paying attention to what the DSA actually believes.

With there still being many unanswered questions around the death of 18-year old Nolan Wells, CNN First of All host Victor Blackwell appeared to understand on Saturday that baseless speculation was unhelpful. However, that still did not stop him from defending the assumption that race had something to do with as well as more far-reaching claims about the entire state of Mississippi and white people more generally. Blackwell began by laying out what is not known about the case before getting to the reaction, “His body was found on the island on Monday, and there's a lot we still don't know about what happened in between. He did not return on the boat with his friends. Why? At some point he got separated from his cell phone. Why? In the absence of facts, people are reacting to a photo. This photo. It's of Nolan and his friends that day. The disparity jumps out. Four friends. One is black. The three white friends made it home. Nolan did not.”   CNN's Victor Blackwell defends people making assumptions that Nolan Wells' disapearence had something to do with race and not trusting Misssissippi to investigate his death properly, "That simple fact led to a lot of people reacting to his death to make a few assumptions that by… pic.twitter.com/t8vd6COROk — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 11, 2026   He admitted that as of the airing of his show, the attempts to make a narrative about racial malice are simply assumptions, but he still defended them, “And that simple fact led to a lot of people reacting to his death to make a few assumptions that by being the only black person in an all white space, his safety, their loyalty as friends were already in doubt. It's suspicion and speculation, but it does not come out of nowhere.” Blackwell also urged viewers to, “Look up his name on social media and you'll find so many people sharing their own stories online about how challenging it's been to be the only, or one of a few black people at a gathering. Maybe they've had these lived experiences themselves. Maybe they’re the parents of black boys or girls in that situation right now.” He then defended the family’s attorney, racial ambulance chaser Benjamin Crump, for not trusting Mississippi authorities as if it was still the 1960s, “Others who don't share that lived experience may say, ‘Well, let's just let the investigation play out.’ And let's be clear that should happen. And the investigation is very much still ongoing, but there's already distrust with that too. The family's legal team is quick to point out this happened in Mississippi, a state with fraught racial history, to say the least. To that point, the family has commissioned an independent autopsy. They say they want transparency and respect and answers.”   Later, Blackwell asks Wells's mother, Christine Wonsley, if she ever worried about his white friends' loyality, "As Ben said on the news conference, it looked like maybe he was the only black person on the island or in the video we've seen so far. And I wonder, was there ever a… pic.twitter.com/HnK3y16NTr — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 11, 2026   Blackwell then introduced Wells’s parents and Crump. In that interview, he asked Wells’s mother, Christine Wonsley, if she ever worried about her son being the only black member of this particular friend group: Christine, you made a point a moment ago about telling your son that the love he gives out may not come back in return. And what a lot of people are responding to online are the images of your son being the only black person in this photo. As Ben said on the news conference, it looked like maybe he was the only black person on the island or in the video we've seen so far. And I wonder, was there ever a moment that you thought that if something went down, if your son needed these friends, that the loyalty would be questionable because he was the only black person in this circle that he was in this day. What a horrible question to ask: pushing racial distrust for the sake of a narrative with no evidence. It is unfortunately true that friends have murdered friends before, but if there was a racial component to Wells’s death then you have to wonder why they were friends to begin with. For her part, Wonsley was eager for her son to be remembered as somebody who got along with everybody.  Here is a transcript for the July 11 show: CNN First of All With Victor Blackwell 7/11/2026 8:01 AM ET VICTOR BLACKWELL: His body was found on the island on Monday, and there's a lot we still don't know about what happened in between. He did not return on the boat with his friends. Why? At some point he got separated from his cell phone. Why? In the absence of facts, people are reacting to a photo. This photo. It's of Nolan and his friends that day. The disparity jumps out. Four friends. One is black. The three white friends made it home. Nolan did not. And that simple fact led to a lot of people reacting to his death to make a few assumptions that by being the only black person in an all white space, his safety, their loyalty as friends were already in doubt. It's suspicion and speculation, but it does not come out of nowhere. Look up his name on social media, and you'll find so many people sharing their own stories online about how challenging it's been to be the only, or one of a few black people at a gathering. Maybe they've had these lived experiences themselves. Maybe they’re the parents of black boys or girls in that situation right now. Others who don't share that lived experience may say, “Well, let's just let the investigation play out.” And let's be clear that should happen. And the investigation is very much still ongoing, but there's already distrust with that too. The family's legal team is quick to point out this happened in Mississippi, a state with fraught racial history, to say the least. To that point, the family has commissioned an independent autopsy. They say they want transparency and respect and answers. Nolan's parents are with us now. … Christine, you made a point a moment ago about telling your son that the love he gives out may not come back in return. And what a lot of people are responding to online are the images of your son being the only black person in this photo. As Ben said on the news conference, it looked like maybe he was the only black person on the island or in the video we've seen so far. And I wonder, was there ever a moment that you thought that if something went down, if your son needed these friends, that the loyalty would be questionable because he was the only black person in this circle that he was in this day. CHRISTINE WONSLEY: So this is the thing. Regardless of the color of anyone's skin, your hope is that the people your children call friends will be there. Like, that is any parent's hope, right? Unfortunately, there are just so many patterns here in America. When you start to talk about the African community, we've seen this time and time again, which again, because I've seen the discourse about, “Oh my gosh, you know, how can these black parents just allow their son to be the token black boy of the group?” And that's the issue. Like Nolan was friends with everybody. When you look at all the messages, all of the people that are speaking out regarding Nolan, they are coming from all different backgrounds because and, you know, he just--he loved everybody. Nolan was a peacemaker. He wanted everybody to feel included. Again, he was just such a rare soul. And, you know, you always hope, like I said before, you always hope that your children's friends or even your friends as adults are going to step up and be by your side and help you when you're in need. But I can't fully answer that other than that.