TMZ Live - 8/13/26

Welcome to TMZ Live. Charles is off for a couple of days. There is a fascinating case, and it is going on really in three states right now, but it involves a woman who became a surrogate to two biological parents, and her name is McKenna. She lives in Alaska. The parents, the biological parents, are from California. Twenty weeks into McKenna's pregnancy, they did an ultrasound and discovered that there was a severe defect in the fetus, and it involved the heart, and it would require at least three surgeries to correct. It's unclear if that was any kind of a guarantee, whether there would be lingering problems. The parents, apparently, the biological parents, wanted to terminate the pregnancy, and the contract said that they had a right to do so. So McKenna, from Alaska, then flew to Texas, where that clause would not be enforceable because of the various abortion laws, and so she was in Texas as a safe haven to give birth, and she has done so. The baby was actually due September 2nd, but she has had the baby prematurely, apparently, and the baby is in the hospital, apparently still in need of significant care, and now there's an issue of custody, and the biological parents, we found out, have gone to court, and they have asked for a temporary restraining order, essentially keeping McKenna, the surrogate, away from the baby, and that they would have custody of the baby because they have an agreement saying once McKenna gave birth, they got the baby, the boy, and the judge decided that at least on its face, the biological parents' argument made sense, and the judge issued this temporary restraining order, effectively giving the biological parents custody of this child, and that's really significant because they're going to have to make some major medical decisions almost immediately, and now, it's a temporary order. These are generally good for around 10 days, and then what a judge does is sets it for a more formal hearing where you can have witnesses, where the judge can consider everything before coming up with a permanent decision, but this now is a case involving a contract, three different states, and a really contentious fight. And you also have this statement that we got from the lawyers of the biological parents this morning where they confirmed she had the baby yesterday, it was in their care. The other interesting aspect here in their statement is they're talking about how this has become almost a political theater because the Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton, had gotten involved saying that he wanted two Texas hospitals in Dallas to basically provide life-threatening care to the baby. Life-saving care. The attorney for the biological parents is saying they feel like there's too much politics now involved, they just want to spend time with their child. That's the murky part. They want to spend time with their child, I get it. What about the care? Because this child was born with a defective heart, and it's going to require surgeries, and these parents, and I'm not saying they're going to do anything untoward, but they wanted to terminate the pregnancy, and they were unable to do so, so now the issue is they're in control of medical decisions for the child, and it would seem that what the Attorney General of Texas is saying is we want to make sure that they're not taking their foot off the gas when it comes to medical decisions, and if they are, we're going to step in to protect the child. I mean, that's what it feels like. That's what's interesting about McKenna going to Texas to have the baby, because in Texas, according to law, even with the surrogacy agreement, whoever the surrogate is, is the guardian and has the custody. But because the parents are from California, the surrogate's from Alaska, the agreement was made in California, it gets a little confusing, and I think that's why the biological parents were quick to get that restraining order. So it would seem that California law would apply, there's a surrogacy agreement in place, but I will get back to this point, is that the, and I'm not a doctor, so I don't know, but I would think that decisions have to be made, doctors go to the parents, and they say, here are the risks, here are the benefits, do you want this, whether this means surgery or medication or what? And now you would think that the attorney general is looking, are they being aggressive enough to protect the child? Now, I don't know what the parents are thinking or doing, I'm assuming since the baby was born and they wanted a baby, they're going to try to save the baby, but that seems to be the dogfight going on right now, beyond just the surrogate, now what kind of care is the baby going to get? For example, what if the doctors say that, and again, I'm just guessing here, that the Mayo Clinic has specialists in Minnesota, specialists that could perform this surgery in the most effective way, and we should move the baby from Texas to the Mayo Clinic, and then what if the parents disagree with the way the attorney general views it? Is the attorney general going to step in, try to superimpose his judgment? But can he? Can the attorney general? This is such an unusual case. I was going to say, I mean, we don't cover these every day, but the thought that these people just want to have a baby and there's now a restraining order involved and the baby came early and it's got medical needs that need to be taken care of, I have never seen anything like this. Pardon me, our chat right now is kind of debating between themselves about if the parents never wanted the baby initially, shouldn't the surrogate mother be able to make these medical decisions since it is so timely and life-threatening to the baby? See, I don't think you can fairly say that because the parents wanted to terminate the pregnancy that they're not going to care for the baby once the baby is born. I don't think the two necessarily connect and that I think it's a pretty harsh judgment that the parents were, you know, you could argue the parents were being compassionate, you know, when they saw the ultrasound, but now that the baby's born, it's not that they're going to, I think it's, I think it's kind of harsh to put that on the parents. The legal agreement, like that's the surrogacy agreement, is if the parents decide, hey, we want you to terminate the child, the surrogate then has to, she's required to terminate the child. So... Well, but not if she goes to Texas. Well, of course. Because in Texas, they're not going to enforce that provision. And that's exactly what she did. So she's had the baby, everything is now reset. Now the question, what do the parents want to do? Assuming the parents get custody, what do they do? What if they say, we want to move the baby back to California and Ken Paxton, the attorney general says, no, we want the baby to stay in Texas because they wanted the baby aborted and we don't trust the parents. That would be wild. I mean... Our chat was also wondering since like there is this, uh, like, or sorry, they said that if in the contract, wouldn't there be something to state that if you go to a different state that there is something to figure out in the legal agreement between like the parenting? Well, it, whatever they say, if they have a provision, the Texas law would not recognize, uh, even if it was included in the initial contract, the agreements going to fail because that's exactly what happened that she moved to Texas and therefore, um, she had the child. But again, now the issue is a, is the surrogacy agreement going to be honored, um, giving the biological parents custody of the child be, um, does the attorney general have any legal standing to say, we have a dog in this fight and that we want to make sure that the child is handled a certain way medically? Or is that the province of the parents see what if the parents want to move the child outside of Cal outside of Texas, say back to California D what if the doctors recommend something that, you know, is risky and the parents see it one way and Ken Paxton sees it another way. So this is not over and there are some novel issues here, but the real point here is that you've got a child that needs medical care and this can't be something that drags on in a court of law while nothing happens with the child because the child needs care and that care can't wait for the legal system to run its course with a complicated legal and I would argue political case. And so now it's, I've honestly, I have never seen anything quite like this. Okay. From Houston, Texas. And historically thinking of medical cases that do end up having a lot of political undertone to it. They do get messy. They do get sticky. They do get murky. Um, I think this is just a downside to the baby ultimately because now the whole world America has, you know, a say so in who should raise this baby, where this baby should go. It's gotten too political too fast. And like you said, we can't wait until the court system handles it to figure out how this baby is going to be taken care of because this is something that needs to happen sooner than later. Yeah, that's for sure. It does. It has to happen now. I mean, there are medical issues that cannot wait for judges and hearings and trials. Coming up, more news in the Nolan Wells case. So Ben Crump talked about the possibility of the United States justice department getting involved in the case to have a civil rights investigation. But there are some complications right back. More news in the Nolan Wells case. So Ben Crump and the family of Nolan Wells appeared at the National Association of Black Journalists today and held a news conference and Ben Crump made it clear that he does not have faith in officials in Mississippi to get to the bottom of the cause of Nolan Wells death. You know, he died on the 4th of July. They found his body washed up on shore and the family has not ruled out foul play. So Ben Crump talked about the possibility of the United States justice department getting involved in the case to have a civil rights investigation. And that has been done many times in the past where the feds actually move in, you know, in a state case. But there are some complications. Ben Crump talked about it. And then Al Sharpton was also there weighed in. These cases building up in a climate of an administration in Washington that we cannot feel will objectively investigate. There was a time that we could say of state authorities failed us. We can go to the Justice Department. Even under George Bush, we went to the Justice Department. It's interesting because Ben Crump is talking about a civil rights case. And by the way, just to give you an example, in the Rodney King case where the four police officers were acquitted in Simi Valley in a state case, they were then tried federally for a civil rights violation for the same thing. And two of them were convicted. So it happens with some regularity. It happens. Right. But what what Al Sharpton is saying is you have Kash Patel, you have Todd Blanche. And he's saying, we don't trust. We don't trust them. So do you want the civil rights investigation by the feds or don't you? Would be the question. Obviously, I think they do want a full scale investigation from federal authorities, but they want to have oversight or at least eyes on that investigation that they believe that they can conclude it matches the standards they want for it. I don't see that happening. Neither do I. I don't see. And I don't see that. That's not an administration thing. You just the feds are never going to give oversight away to private individuals with an agenda. That's right. to their son. But it's not even that they just don't do it. The one thing that they do want is they want Nolan's phone analyzed where they can watch it being analyzed because they they don't trust Mississippi authorities to fairly look at the phone and decide, has anything been deleted? Has anything been altered? What are the text messages that were sent? And that phone seems to be a real bone of contention when I get entirely, I understand why they'd want to keep their eyes on this. So apparently the family still has the phone. They have not turned it over to the phone, apparently, and they don't want to turn it over unless they get assurances that they can have oversight and see exactly what's happening forensically with it. I think that's what's happening. And I get that from the parents perspective. They don't believe it's really been handled that way, whether you agree with them or not. They just want to be able to see it and make sure that it's being handled well. And that what comes back is, nope, nothing to see here when they think there is something to see. And I think they have they have a stronger hand here because they can go to the authorities and say, look, we're not going to turn the phone over unless you give us that oversight. And if you don't, we'll have it analyzed ourselves. And we'll put it on videotape so everybody can see it. Now, what I don't understand is, couldn't the authorities in Mississippi get a subpoena to force the family to turn the phone over? In about two seconds. It's a, it's inherent to a potential murder investigation. So why? Well, they haven't. A death investigation. Right, right, right. Why hasn't that happened? I don't know the answer to that. I was surprised to learn that the family was holding on to this and that they were had conditions upon the turning it over to authorities, because that seems to me the authorities should have had that a long time ago. Frankly, this, this young man's been dead for over a month. And I would have thought they would have gotten that phone, seized it, locked down, already forensically analyzed to see what's happening. I don't understand that element at all. Drexen New York City. I kind of understand the element. I can understand why a family wouldn't be as trusting of the Mississippi state system to handle the case and why they may not be as trusting. No, no, no. I agree with you. What I don't. I agree with you on that. I get why they'd be distrusting. What I don't understand is why hasn't Mississippi just gone and gotten a subpoena and said, okay, if you don't want to, if you don't want to do it the easy way, we'll do it the hard way. We have a subpoena. Give us the phone. Now that I don't understand either. I think this whole case has been weirdly managed and I think it's really going to come down to the, to the boys that were there. And if, if no one is as much of a friend and a brother as they keep saying that they are, I would be doing everything I could as a friend to help solve this case, you know, and, and the fact that this feels to be oddly handled both by the Mississippi government and also by these boys, it's suspicious to me. Yeah. I mean, I'll tell you, this is one where people are viewing this in various ways, various ways. We are live streaming TMZ live as we do every day. And somebody in the live stream just said, I never thought I would see the day when Selena Gomez was sued for fraud, but that is exactly what has happened. Selena, her mom, and an entrepreneur who had a company that dealt with mental wellness, they solicited investors and they got two companies to invest a million dollars or so in this new company. It's called wonder mind, I believe. Yes. And that the idea was Selena would be actively involved, would front the company by doing PR and Selena has been involved in the health and wellness community for a long, long time. Talked about her own struggles and the investors thought this is a good gamble. Turned out not to be a good gamble. The cut did a story a few years after they launched, the company launched and said that wonder mind was a mess and eventually folded. And now these companies that invested are suing, saying we've been had by Selena and her mom. Yes. You guys both tricked us into investing over a million dollars into the company. They claim they didn't know anything about this until the cut article came out and they learned Selena's mom, Mandy, allegedly had substance abuse disorder issues. Which her mom denies. Mom denies that. There's also just a lot of mismanagement going on. They claim they were lied to about deals that the company had. Selena's involvement. Selena did go on a press blitz for a couple months, but then after that, she kind of didn't have much involvement in that. But yeah, I mean, these are some pretty serious allegations. I never, I actually agree with the chat that I, if you would have put a list together and said, who's going to get sued for fraud this week, I would not put her on that list. Our chat still denies that they ever think Selena could do this. They think it's definitely just the mom's influence or the mom just doing it by herself and dragging Selena in. Blaming on the mom. Dennis Bonnicelli, Boca Raton, Florida. Many investors love to use a recognizable celebrity face to help jumpstart their company. And when plans fall through, they like to blame said celebrity. But in the case of Selena Gomez, I don't really understand what the investors were really expecting for her to be part of day-to-day operations, knowing she has a music career, a beauty line. She's filming projects like Only Murderers in the building. So I think that's her real- Yeah, but I got to say, I'm sorry. I got to challenge you on this. There have been over the last, I don't know, eight or nine years with Bitcoin, with other things, there have been celebrities who have been sued for enticing people into buying products or, in this case, into investing. And the courts have been receptive to the argument because you can't just say, well, I'm a celebrity and I'm busy, therefore, what do you expect me to do? If there is an overture that they're going to do something, and I don't know if there was here or not, but if there's an overture, they have to follow through or they can get sued. Coming up, Pitchfork gave you a zero out of ten, which hasn't happened in 19 years. I don't really know what Pitchfork is. All I know is the devil uses a pitchfork. That's all I know. Be right back. TMZ's got every freaking thing. Big celebs, big stories, big events. Donald Rawlings took TMZ DC on a city tour. You know what the irony of this is? A black man takes a white person to the White House. It's TMZ. So one of the most interesting album releases in a long time is an album by Starface, aka Tyga, who we've known for many, many years. This album has gotten a lot of attention. It's gotten attention because it employs AI to a degree that has pissed off a lot of people in the music industry and really has created a divide because a lot of people, and I'm going to just declare going in, myself included, believe that you cannot stop AI. It's just not going to stop. The idea of saying, we're not going to use AI is ridiculous. But there are other people who say it's not ridiculous and think that it is a betrayal of artistry in music. So we're going to get into it right now with Starface, who is joining us. Welcome to TMZ Live. Thanks for having me. We appreciate it. So what do you think of all this? Look, we should just say, you know, going into this, that Pitchfork gave you a zero out of 10, which hasn't happened in 19 years, and it's pretty clear they're doing it because of AI. So what do you think of all of this? Listen, I don't really know what Pitchfork is. All I know is the devil uses a pitchfork. That's all I know. Okay. What do you think of the AI controversy generally? Because there are some, look, there are some people saying you shouldn't do it. Well, the context is, well, unfortunately for Gen Z, they can't read. So nobody reads. You know what I mean? And what I said was, I used AI assisted things in the production. I said, all the vocals are me. I wrote all the songs. When it comes to the 80 cents and some of the guitar solos, yes, I used AI for that, but I didn't use, I didn't make a full AI album. That's like, it's not what I did. I was in the studio three months working on this, you know, but, you know, it's just, you know, at the end of the day, it's like, I'm just a, you know, I'm a small puzzle, piece of the puzzle in this bigger conversation, you know, and it's really not my fight. You know what I mean? It's just, I'm just telling people, cause I like to be honest with the listeners of, you know, kind of like how I used it, but I didn't, you know, I, I indeed wrote the songs and, and, um, that those are my vocals, you know what I'm saying? And we use some AI sounds in the production, but we still created everything. You know, I, I gotta say, I mean, look, I, I would like to argue with you, but I really can't, um, um, because you, you know, what do they call it? A synthesizer where they used to have like bands come into recording studios or in performances. And then all of a sudden you can have one dude playing 19 instruments and yet it's actually cost some musicians, their livelihood, but it's the way of the world right now. And when people record and at Capitol record say, it's not going to be a full, uh, orchestra, you're going to have, you know, a synthesizer or something like that. And I was thinking, what's really the difference between that and what you did. And I can't really see a difference. Yeah. You know, I mean, it's just a bigger conversation. People are just scared. Like as an artist that's been doing this for so long, I don't, I don't care. I don't mind it. I don't care. Like, I'm not scared for my position or scared because I think the day I'm better than the AI, you know, and I've proven that for the last 15 years, so it doesn't bother somebody like me. Um, uh, but I, I think maybe there's people that are scared that it's going to, you know, like take their position and replace them and, you know, it's just, it's just a part of technology. You know, everything we use is AI, you know, like this, this, this stream, this call is, is used assisted by AI. You know, everything you use is AI streaming, you know, watching movies and, you know, so we use AI in our office. You know, it's just a conversation that, so the question is, are people against AI or just selective against AI in some things, you know? Okay. So, okay. That's actually a good question. So is it you or is it just anybody using AI? Here's what Doja Cat said. Um, uh, I, nobody asked me anything about Tyga, but I just felt like saying this, Tyga is a penis for making an AI album. Okay. Well, you laughed. Is she, does she have a thing against you or is it AI? Listen, I love Doja, but she made a demonic album, but I still love her. Okay. Why is this happening? That it just feels, look, I'm an old guy, but I feel like I'm younger in my head than all these people who want to just deny the obvious, which is AI is going to be everywhere in the next five years and you can't stop it. And I, I, I just, I, I'm interested in you as a case study because I just don't know why people are going after you. Like whether you do it or not, it's going to happen anyway. It's, I mean, it is what it is, you know, it's, it's, it's fine. It's an experience for me. It's a side quest. This is fine. Like I said, we spent three months, um, working on the music and I'm okay with being in front of the conversation. I'm fine because I love what I'm doing and, um, I think it was great how we used it. You know what I mean? Will you use it again? I don't know. This was the first time I ever used it. Well, I will say it got you a lot of, it got you a lot of publicity. All publicity is good. What does it say? There's no such thing as bad publicity. Yeah. It's, you know, like at the end of the day, people know what I do, but doing it for so long making hits catalog without writers, AI, any of this. So this is just a experiment and this was fun, you know? And I'm just telling people where it's going. The world is going and how I used it, you know, the world is going where you say, uh, the album is called star face. We really appreciate you coming on and we, and we got some live shows. I just announced the two live shows. We're doing two star phase, live shows, one at LA, one in New York. You guys should definitely come out and see it live. We're in LA. Uh, we're doing the Roxy in LA. So it's going to be fun. We're going to do, we're going to do an 80s dance party, you know, and, uh, we're going to perform some songs for the album and it's going to be great. I love dress 80s and dress 80s. You know, I love the Roxy. Okay, man. Thanks so much for coming on. Thanks for having me. Luigi has requested a hearing tomorrow in federal court, and we know that they have been in active plea bargain negotiations with the feds because they want to cop a plea before the state case goes to trial. Be right back. Welcome back to TMZ live. Uh, there is an old song, um, which I love by Barth Reeves and the Phandelas, uh, nowhere to run. Uh, it goes nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. That is kind of the case with Luigi Mangione, um, that he is now facing murder charges in two courts in state court in New York and federal court. And there is a problem here because, um, if the state tries him first, um, that's going to be a big problem, uh, when he goes to federal court and the state case is coming up next month and Luigi has requested a hearing tomorrow in federal court. And we know that they have been in active plea bargain negotiations with the feds because they want to cop a plea in the federal case before the state case goes to trial. Because if there's a plea in the federal case, the state case goes away because of double jeopardy and the clock is ticking and it's not ideal for Luigi because he's going to do prison time. The only issue is how much. And if he pleads guilty to murder, which is what we're told is going to happen, then it's going to be left to a judge and they're going to have a hearing. And in the hearing, Luigi is going to have evidence and psychiatrists and others, maybe himself who will talk about how he was so overwrought with emotion over corporate greed that he did something awful. And he'll hope that a sober federal judge will take that into account and have some leniency in the sentencing life. Life imprisonment is on the table and I do think there's something just by pleading guilty where you've accepted responsibility, you've no longer wasted the court's time and resources in trying the case and that will be taken into account even if they don't take into account all of the. I was extremely against the health care system and emotionally overwrought. He had no other option here. This is the only card he could play. It's the only card he could play. And it helps him in state. I think if he went to trial, given the lay of the land and what the state of the law in the state case in the federal case, he's going to get life in prison if he goes to trial in both. The only thing I was thinking, though, is if you have a jury, given the way this country now thinks about these issues, if you can impanel one and you can hang that jury because they are so against the health care system and sympathetic to what he did, they would continue to try him and try him. They're never going to let the case go. But guess what happens? He stays in prison. He stays in jail. So what is he gaining here? Not much. No. He's gaining nothing if it keeps hung jury, hung jury, hung jury, hung jury. At least here, they're taking a chance on a resolution. They're hoping for a judge who can look at this and say, it's abhorrent what you did. I mean, this is the best case. Abhorrent what you did. No excuse for it. You murdered somebody and you acknowledge you murdered somebody. And for that, we're going to give you 30 years in prison. What a win that would be. That's a huge win. Luigi Mangione would be massive. A huge win. Hi, guys. I'm Claire Isle from Los Angeles. And yes, I have some thoughts on the Luigi Mangione situation. I think this is 100 percent tactical legal chess. By taking a plea on stalking, this legal team is trying to, I think, trigger New York's double jeopardy laws and shut down the state's murder trial jury selection before it even starts next month. It seems like a pretty high stakes gamble to avoid the death penalty and control the narrative to me. So it's going to be really interesting to see what happens. If what you're suggesting, and I've seen this out there, that he'll plead to stalking and they drop the murder charge, that's not going to happen. I do not see, it looks like I may be wrong, but there is no way the feds are dropping the murder charge here. There is just, I don't see, because they've got him dead to rights. So why would they drop the murder charge? I just don't see it. Nicole Kidman apparently rejected the advice of friends when they warned her, if you marry Tom Cruise, you're going to be a trad wife. Nicole actually talked about her marriage to Tom Cruise, which she's never done before. She talked to British Vogue and she was talking about why she married him in the first place. Here's what she said. She said, I remember people saying to me, okay, well, this is really going to affect your career. I'm like, I don't care. I'm in love. I want to be married. So I guess what they're saying is you are taking a backseat to somebody huge like Tom Cruise when you're not really established or not well-established as an actress, if you marry him. The weird thing to me is, I mean, I remember the time she married him in the, I believe the 80s. What, choosing love over your career? No, no, no. That's the weird thing to you? No, what the weird thing to me is that I think it hugely benefited her career. How so? Because her visibility skyrocketed when she married Tom Cruise. Everybody knew about Nicole Kidman. Who did Tom Cruise pick to be his wife? Nicole Kidman. And I know that she had a big launch of her career after the divorce, but during the marriage, knowing that she was the one married to Tom Cruise, her visibility, her name recognition went sky high. She was only 23 at the time, which I didn't even realize she got married that young. But I feel like it is a double-edged sword, though. You have to see what people were saying to her, is that you can be this big, massive A-list actress, which she ended up becoming, but if she stayed with Tom Cruise, you're always going to be Tom Cruise's wife. And I don't know if they had stayed together, who even knows if she would have had the career that she ended up having. But that's not true. There have been marriages where the person with lesser fame becomes bigger, and it's flip-flopped during a marriage, and that's happened. Yeah, I guess. But I do see why, I mean, the craziest thing to me is that she was willing to like, I don't care about my career, I was so in love with this guy. Or she did care about her career. And she said it, but it really helped her career. So Lionel Richie kind of showed his hand. He was on stage performing, and he made reference to Chris Brown, Usher, their concert tour that they're going on right now. And he shaded them, and I think there's something behind this. So Lionel Richie kind of showed his hand. He was on stage performing, and he made reference to Chris Brown, Usher, their concert tour that they're going on right now. And doing extremely well with. And he shaded them, and I think there's something behind this. Okay, so that's shade. We didn't go to jail, so he's talking about Earth, Wind, and Fire and the Commodores going on tour. That's true. So what Chris Brown decided to do was talk about old man Richie. He said, damn, Unc, we love you, papa. I mean, that's a pretty good response. That's pretty restrained for Chris Brown, honestly. Still, because I'm sure Chris Brown probably respects Lionel Richie. You have to, as an artist. So is Lionel Richie, I'm trying to think, why would he say that? Is it because he thought it was funny? Because it kind of gets in his craw that people are saying this is such a unique concert with Chris Brown and Usher, and he's thinking about the Commodores and Earth, Wind, and Fire? I'm trying to figure out. It's all those things. Maybe a little bit of, you know, Lionel Richie's still a very competitive person, and he's got these, you know, younger than him artists. They've both been around for a while now, but, you know, they come out and they're doing their thing. Like, we're at this big R&B tour. And he's like, I did that 40 years ago. Okay, I get it, but he's got to be self-aware enough to know that it just makes him seem so old. No, I'm serious. Because I get it. Yeah. Well, everybody in that crowd gets it, too. Lionel Richie, because he's older, is not thinking this is going to go viral and everyone's going to see it. He's thinking the people who paid to come here and see me are not Chris Brown fans. They will laugh at this. I don't know that it's mutually exclusive. I do not know that it's mutually exclusive. Well, the crowd kind of gasped. I don't know if they were... I mean, they didn't laugh. They gasped. He realized right away, like, I'm going to walk this back and dial it down a bit. It's amazing Chris Brown didn't sing Old Man River. So there is a high school teacher in Texas, and he was lamenting the illiteracy of the people graduating. I have seniors who simply cannot read. Be right back. So there is a guy named Darius Williams, who is a high school teacher in Texas, and he was lamenting the illiteracy of the people graduating from his high school, and it literally brought him to tears. I literally broke down in the middle of class. These kids are leaving high school and going to college, and they couldn't fill in four words. This is only day two. And I have seniors who simply cannot read and seniors who cannot write. They cannot write. They can reason. They have the ability to defend their reasoning if it's talking to their homeboy, but applying that to a written text, two paragraphs, and they couldn't do it. Our young black men, our young brown men, our young black girls, and our young brown girls. Oh, God. It's so sad that, I mean, he is talking about the future and just the idea that he just couldn't get them to learn. And I don't know that this is limited to any one group. I mean, there's a big issue about graduating students who just don't have the basic skills. Hi, I'm Leticia, and I do think that, I'm Leticia, I'm from North Carolina, I'm sorry. And I do think that because I have a mom that's in the education system, that it is pretty serious for how the education system is going downhill for right now. So I do understand his tears. It is kind of sad that he had his badge showing. I think that's a big deal going on right now. But in general, I get his sentiment because it is happening in real time, how the trajectory of this system is going. And you really, you know, you really feel it when you hear him, because you could just tell how much he wants his students to succeed and how invested he is, and just how heartbroken he is. I love Brooks Nader. I love her because, aside from her being beautiful and all the other stuff, she's just filled with ambition. And she makes her own luck. And I kind of love that. And she's made it clear that Tara Nedgerton, if it existed, is over and out. Be right back. Okay, I will fully disclose, I love Brooks Nader. I love her because, aside from her being beautiful and all the other stuff, she's just filled with ambition. And she makes her own luck. And I kind of love that. So she is in Capri with a dude named Jack Lundsten, who is a Wilhelmina model. And they are clearly together, at least for the day. And she's made it clear that Tara Nedgerton, if it existed, is over and out. If that was anything to begin with. And she was all over this guy. Also, some slips with her dress, so to speak, as they're sitting there eating. And everything she does is intentional. And she knows what she's doing. When you look at the two of them, go to the website, go to TMZ.com, and look at all the pictures. But it's so obvious that they're playing to the camera. And there are some people who play to the camera where you just, it's painful. With her, it is hilarious. So that's my take on Brooks Nader. See you tomorrow.