Key Takeaways

• President Trump praised House Republicans but skipped most of his Cabinet
• He nervously avoided naming secretaries seen as unpopular with Democrats
• He highlighted Speaker Mike Johnson and Steve Scalise instead
• Reports say he plans a major Cabinet shake-up in 2026

The White House Congressional Ball Tradition

Each holiday season, the president and first lady host a bipartisan party. Lawmakers from both parties gather to celebrate and to honor Congress’s role. Every year, the event offers a rare chance to mix politics with a festive spirit. However, ongoing disputes often hang in the air. This year, President Trump used his speech to spotlight allies and to quietly skip naming most of his Cabinet.

Trump’s Speech Highlights

First, the president thanked House Republicans for their hard work. He called out Speaker Mike Johnson and Majority Leader Whip Steve Scalise by name. Then, he claimed he had everyone present. Yet he admitted he would avoid naming some top aides. In fact, he said those names would draw jeers from the largely Democratic crowd. This moment became the Trump snubs Cabinet scene that many in the room noticed.

The Moment He Snubbed His Cabinet

During his speech, Trump paused and said he would not call out certain secretaries. He explained that such names would not receive applause. He praised their work, but left them unnamed. As a result, his absence of specific mentions stood out. Many guests exchanged puzzled looks. Meanwhile, cameras captured the empty acknowledgment. This clear slight made headlines almost immediately.

Why Trump Snubs Cabinet Members

The president fears negative reactions from Democrats. Therefore, he shields them from boos. Moreover, he wants to keep the event light and focused on bipartisanship. His choice to highlight loyal Republicans also underscored his priorities. As a result, the Trump snubs Cabinet strategy played out in real time. Yet this approach may stir questions about unity within his own team.

Potential Cabinet Changes in 2026

Reports suggest Trump plans a big cleanup next year. He might replace three major officials. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Pentagon Chief Pete Hegseth face possible ouster. Additionally, insiders hint at shifts in other departments. Even though the ball was a social occasion, these rumors colored the president’s tone. In fact, he hinted at “making America great again” by reshuffling top aides.

Reactions from Lawmakers and Analysts

Some lawmakers saw the snub as awkward. They felt the president ignored key members of his team. Others thought it was smart politics. They believed Trump wanted to avoid boos and to keep the focus on holiday cheer. Analysts pointed out that such moves can strain relations within the Cabinet. However, it can also signal who holds real influence in the administration.

A Closer Look at Cabinet Popularity

Secretaries usually earn applause at White House events. Yet some face public backlash over policies. For example, debates over border security and military strategy divide opinions. Consequently, the president weighs crowd reactions before naming officials. In this case, he chose not to risk a public relations hiccup. Thus, the Trump snubs Cabinet moment became a calculated choice.

The Impact on Administration Unity

Ignoring top aides in public can hurt team morale. Cabinet members want recognition for their work. When the president publicly omits them, trust can fray. However, leaders sometimes make tough calls for optics. In fact, balancing praise and politics is part of any administration’s playbook. Yet, skipping names at a major event raises fresh concerns about unity.

What the Snub Means for the Holiday Event

Despite the tension, the Congressional Ball remained festive. Guests enjoyed music, food, and mingling. Transitioning from a political stage to a party scene, the mood lifted. Nevertheless, the memory of the snub lingered. It reminded attendees that politics often underlie even casual gatherings. Moreover, the event showed how leaders manage public perception.

Looking Ahead to 2026

As lawmakers leave holiday recess, they will recall the snub. It may shape future strategy in Congress. Additionally, administration insiders will watch for cabinet changes. Will the rumored shake-up happen? Only time will tell. Meanwhile, Trump’s choice at the Ball stands as a sign of his priorities. It also highlights the fine line between celebration and strategy.

FAQs

What led President Trump to skip naming his Cabinet members at the Ball?

He feared some secretaries would face boos from a Democratic audience. This choice aimed to maintain the event’s festive tone.

Who did Trump praise instead of his own Cabinet?

He specifically thanked Speaker Mike Johnson and Majority Leader Whip Steve Scalise, both key House Republicans.

Are there plans for a Cabinet reshuffle in 2026?

Yes, reports suggest he may replace major officials like Kristi Noem and Pete Hegseth to refresh his team.

How might this snub affect the administration?

Omitting top aides in public can hurt morale and spark questions about unity. It may also signal which officials hold real influence.

Key Takeaways

• The administration dropped commemorative quarters honoring slavery’s end, women’s vote, and civil rights icons.
• Instead, 2026 coins will feature early presidents and founding-era scenes.
• Critics accuse the move of erasing key chapters of American history.
• Officials say they’re rejecting diversity and inclusion themes for classic founding imagery

The Trump administration sparked outrage by scrapping planned commemorative quarters that would honor abolition, women’s suffrage, and civil rights heroes. Instead, the U.S. Mintannounced new 2026 designs focused on early presidents and founding documents. Critics call this a political rewrite of history.

Why Commemorative Quarters Mattered

Commemorative quarters celebrate defining moments and people in our past. The Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee spent years developing designs. They proposed images of Frederick Douglass, key suffrage activists, and Ruby Bridges. These coins would tell stories of struggle, achievement, and progress. For many, they offered visible reminders of America’s journey toward equality.

Moreover, commemorative quarters help educate millions of Americans. These coins reach every pocket and register, sparking curiosity. Younger generations could learn about champions who fought for freedom and rights. Free school lessons or history books are not the only way to discover the past. Coins carry those stories into daily life.

The New Quarter Designs Unveiled

Instead of celebrating civil rights, the new coins will highlight early headlines of freedom. The Mint will base the 2026 quarter series on the Mayflower Compact, the Revolutionary War, and the Gettysburg Address. Portraits of presidents from the founding era will replace modern heroes.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent holds final design approval. U.S. Treasurer Brandon Beach told Fox News Digital the change turns away from a focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion, and critical race theory policies. Acting Mint Director Kristie McNally said the designs “depict America’s journey toward a more perfect union” and celebrate “defining ideals of liberty.”

Backlash Grows on Social Media

Reaction on social media was swift and fierce. Critics charged the move with rewriting or erasing history.

Jennifer J. Monteith criticized the plan on X, calling it an attempt to “erase 250 years of American history directed at Blacks, Women, Slavery, Civil Rights Leaders.” Stephanie Grace lamented the loss of the Ruby Bridges quarter, saying “They killed the quarter that would have honored Ruby Bridges.”

Public education advocate Lanet Greenhaw warned, “Deplorable! Trump must not be allowed to re-write or cancel history!!” Trip Gabriel suggested watching Ken Burns’s “The American Revolution” on PBS for a fuller story of nonwhite Americans.

Pulitzer Prize columnist Kyle Whitmire added, “Some of our country’s greatest achievements are not considered achievements by this administration.” Patt Morrison noted there is “evidently no level of disrespect for women and people of color that this regime will not sink to.”

Assistant professor J. Thibodeaux concluded, “Not surprised. And not surprising that the American people will simply let this happen.”

Political Context and the Trump Coin Proposal

This move follows President Trump’s ousting of all Commission of Fine Arts members earlier this year. That panel must review and approve any coin design by law. By removing them, the administration cleared obstacles to its preferred imagery.

Meanwhile, there is talk of an official Trump dollar coin. Early designs circulated by U.S. Treasurer Brandon Beach show Trump’s face after his 2024 assassination attempt. They bear the slogan “fight, fight, fight.” The proposal remains unapproved, but it underscores the political use of U.S. currency.

What This Means for U.S. History on Currency

Currency tells a nation’s story. For generations, designs celebrated diverse leaders and milestones. Now, critics fear a narrowing of that tale. They worry future coins will skip chapters about civil rights and social progress.

However, some experts say coin designs often reflect current politics. They note past administrations also shifted themes to suit their agendas. Still, defenders of the original commemorative quarters say history belongs to all Americans, not just its earliest leaders.

Looking Ahead

Will public pressure reverse this decision? It could require Congressional action or a new advisory committee review. Lawmakers or citizen groups might push for legislation mandating inclusive designs. Grassroots petitions and continued social media protests could also sway the Treasury.

Moreover, collectors and educators may lobby for special releases or commemorative sets outside the regular quarter program. They could work with museums or private mints to keep the stories of Douglass, Bridges, and the suffrage movement alive in metal.

Finally, the debate raises larger questions about how we choose to remember our past. As the 2026 quarter series takes shape, Americans will be watching to see which chapters of history get minted—and which get forgotten.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who decides quarter designs?

The U.S. Mint works with the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee and the Commission of Fine Arts. The Treasury Secretary has final approval.

Why did the administration scrap commemorative quarters?

Officials said they wanted to move away from diversity, equity, and inclusion themes toward classic founding imagery.

Which themes will appear on the new quarters?

The 2026 series will show early presidents and scenes related to the Mayflower Compact, the Revolutionary War, and the Gettysburg Address.

Can the public challenge this decision?

Yes. Citizens can petition Congress, lobby officials, or support legislation to require inclusive designs. Continued media attention can also influence changes.

Key takeaways

• Former Mesa County clerk Tina Peters was convicted on seven state charges.
• Donald Trump announced a “full Pardon” for her efforts to expose alleged voter fraud.
• Peters’s attorney called the pardon news “freaking fantastic.”
• Legal experts note Trump cannot pardon state crimes.
• The pardon claim raises questions about next steps in her case.

Inside the Tina Peters Pardon Announcement

Donald Trump posted on his social media platform that he granted a “full Pardon” to Tina Peters. He praised her as a “Patriot” who sought honest elections. In his message, he claimed Democrats unfairly targeted her. He said she sits in a Colorado prison for demanding fair voting.

Meanwhile, Peters’s attorney, Peter Ticktin, learned of the pardon while reporters read Trump’s post aloud. He called it “freaking fantastic.” However, he admitted he had not heard any official news before that call. He spoke with a White House correspondent, who shared their conversation online.

Notably, Trump’s statement used loose language and quotation marks around “pardon.” He framed Peters’s actions as exposing voter fraud in a rigged election. Yet the announcement did not come through any official government channel.

Background on Tina Peters’s Case

In 2024, a Colorado jury found Tina Peters guilty on seven charges. Those charges stemmed from her move to help Trump supporters access county voting machines. She allegedly allowed people to view and copy election data without proper approval.

A judge sentenced her to nine years in state prison. She lost her clerk job and faced steep fines. Supporters saw her as a whistle-blower. Critics said she risked election security and broke the law.

Before her conviction, Peters had promoted false claims of widespread voter fraud. She joined a wave of local officials who stirred doubt about the 2020 results. Yet courts dismissed those claims for lack of evidence.

Reaction to the Tina Peters Pardon

Peters’s legal team reacted with joy at Trump’s pardon claim. Her lawyer said the news was “freaking fantastic” and gave him chills. He saw it as proof of her patriotic role.

Her supporters have rallied outside the prison, waving flags and chanting her name. They believe she faced unjust treatment. They plan fundraisers to cover her legal fees. Moreover, some activists call for her immediate release based on Trump’s post.

On the other hand, election experts warn against celebrations. They note the lack of official paperwork. They stress that a social media post does not erase a state conviction. Therefore, Peters remains behind bars for now.

Legal Limits on the Tina Peters Pardon

Under the U.S. Constitution, the president can only pardon federal crimes. State offenses fall under state governors or clemency boards. As a result, Trump’s pardon claim has no legal effect on Peters’s state sentence.

Colorado’s clemency process requires an application to the governor’s office. The governor or a state board reviews the case and decides on a pardon. Thus far, Peters has not received such relief.

Furthermore, legal scholars say pretending to pardon state crimes can confuse the public. They argue it could undermine faith in the legal system. They note that no president has ever claimed this power before.

Peters’s attorney hinted at a broader argument. He said the founders wrote the Constitution in ways that might allow more presidential power. However, most experts dismiss that view as extreme. They warn it risks overstepping clear constitutional limits.

What Comes Next for Tina Peters?

First, Peters’s team may file for state clemency. They could appeal to the governor for a genuine pardon. They will likely highlight Trump’s public support. Next, they might turn to state courts for a sentence review.

Meanwhile, her supporters plan rallies to keep attention on her case. They see Trump’s message as a rallying cry. They hope public pressure will push Colorado officials to act.

Also, election officials worry about the precedent this pardon claim could set. They fear more local officials might defy election laws. They stress that secure voting systems protect democracy.

Finally, Peters will remain in prison until a state authority intervenes. Without a formal pardon or legal change, she must serve her sentence. Observers will watch closely for any official clemency move.

Conclusion

Trump’s social media announcement shocked many. His “Tina Peters pardon” claim energized her fans but alarmed legal experts. Since the president cannot pardon state crimes, the move has no immediate effect. Peters’s fate now lies in Colorado’s hands. Supporters and critics alike will track every step in this unfolding story.

FAQs

What does a state pardon require?

A state pardon involves a formal process. In Colorado, the governor or a clemency board reviews an application. They consider evidence, public safety, and justice. Without that process, no pardon can take effect.

Can a president pardon state crimes?

No. The president can only grant pardons for federal offenses. State crimes remain under the control of governors or state boards. Any claim otherwise lacks constitutional backing.

What happens if Colorado denies the pardon request?

If the state denies clemency, Peters must serve her sentence. Her legal team could seek appeals or resentencing in court. However, odds are slimmer once a denial is official.

Why does this matter for election security?

This case highlights the balance between whistle-blowing and election integrity. Allowing unauthorized access to voting systems can harm public trust. Officials worry similar actions could recur without clear consequences.

Key Takeaways

• Former GOP staffer Tim Miller and host Nicole Wallace slammed Trump’s call for Americans to give up pencils.
• Trump urged citizens to tighten their belts and support US companies over foreign ones.
• Wallace spotted 37 new gold-gilded items in the Oval Office—one per “pencil.”
• The “Trump pencils” pitch drew mockery and undercut his core economic promise.
• This clash highlights rising public anger over inflation and presidential tone-deafness.

Trump pencils call clashes with Oval Office opulence

Introduction

President Donald Trump recently told Americans to tighten their belts for the holidays. He urged citizens to give up certain products. In particular, he joked that kids only need one or two pencils. This “Trump pencils” suggestion came as part of his effort to praise tariffs on overseas goods. Yet critics see it as out of touch. Former Republican speechwriter Tim Miller and host Nicole Wallace tore into the message. They called it hypocritical and ripe for mockery.

Trump pencils suggestion explained

The term “Trump pencils” refers to the president’s advice that Americans can give up lists of items from abroad. He claimed every child can get 37 pencils from China, but they only need one or two. He used this example to praise his trade policy. He urged people to buy American-made products instead. Specifically, he said: “You can give up certain products. You can give up pencils because under the China policy, every child can get 37 pencils. They only need one or two.”

However, the “Trump pencils” line struck many as bizarre. Why focus on pencils when families struggle with rising costs? Why turn a school supply into a symbol of sacrifice? In response, media figures and comedians had a field day. They turned the phrase into a punchline, driving home the idea that the suggestion missed the mark.

Wallace exposes Oval Office gold

On her MSNBC segment, Nicole Wallace held up a single photo. It showed one slice of the Oval Office from September. In that image, she counted 37 gold-gilded items. She did not count picture frames, only the new decorative objects. Wallace argued this was a perfect symbol of presidential hypocrisy. She said, “An out-of-touch, literally gold-gilded president is asking families to live without more than two pencils or two dolls.” Meanwhile, he piled 37 gold things on one wall.

This stark contrast drove her point home. She noted that many Americans feel “p—– off” by a leader who lives in luxury while urging them to tighten belts. In addition, she pointed out that the same economic policy is making inflation worse. Thus, the “Trump pencils” ask felt like adding insult to injury.

Why Americans are angry

Inflation has hit household budgets hard. Grocery costs, rent, and fuel prices have climbed steeply. Families worry about holiday spending and end-of-year bills. So advice to “give up pencils” seemed trivial at best. It felt out of sync with real hardships.

Furthermore, many see Trump’s tariffs as backfiring. They argue these taxes drive up prices on everyday goods. Thus, telling Americans to tighten belts for a policy that may worsen inflation felt wrong. In other words, the president asked for sacrifice while showing off his expensive tastes.

Mockery hits Trump’s economy promise

Tim Miller weighed in on the damage. He noted that Trump thrives on strong attacks. He feeds on being called “racist” or “cruel.” However, Miller said the president’s real weakness is mockery. Now, comedians and late-night hosts have a target. They make fun of the “Trump pencils” line. They point out the gold items in the Oval Office.

Miller added: “Right now he’s being mocked on the issue that was core to his campaign. He said he would fix the economy. He criticized inflation under Joe Biden. A year in, we’re near Christmas, and his message is ‘fewer pencils.’ That is extremely mockable.” Indeed, the mockery chips away at Trump’s key message. It also highlights the gap between political rhetoric and daily life.

Gold vs. pencils: a clear contrast

In this debate, gold items symbolize privilege. Pencils stand for ordinary families. When you compare 37 golden objects to two school pencils, the message stings. Trump asked citizens to sacrifice small comforts. Yet he invested in lavish decor. The image of a leader counting gold items while preaching thrift felt surreal.

Moreover, the public tends to punish perceived hypocrisy. When leaders say one thing but do another, trust erodes. This is why the “Trump pencils” controversy gained so much attention. It captured a moment when words and actions clashed starkly.

What this means ahead of the holidays

As holiday spending peaks, families feel squeezed. They plan tighter budgets around food, gifts, and holiday travel. Advice to give up pencils feels unhelpful at best. Critics argue the president should focus on real solutions. Ideas include targeted relief, price controls, or reducing tariffs that raise costs.

The “Trump pencils” episode also shows the power of image. One photo of a gilded office can reshape a narrative. It can shift the debate from policy to personality. In politics, optics often matter as much as facts.

Looking forward, Trump may try to steer attention back to his other pledges. These include stock market gains, energy independence, and border security. Yet the pencil moment continues to follow him. It reminds voters of the gap between elite luxury and everyday struggle.

Conclusion

The “Trump pencils” suggestion became more than a quirky remark. It turned into a symbol of perceived disconnect. Critics like Nicole Wallace and Tim Miller used it to spotlight hypocrisy. They showed how a call for sacrifice rang hollow next to lavish gold decor. As inflation stings and holiday costs rise, Americans demand real solutions. Mocking a pencil line may feel trivial. Yet it strikes at the heart of public trust. And for now, the “Trump pencils” tale holds center stage in the economic debate.

Frequently Asked Questions

How did Trump justify his pencil suggestion?

He praised tariffs on China and urged support for American companies. He said kids only need one or two pencils despite plenty of imports.

What did Nicole Wallace highlight in the Oval Office?

She pointed out 37 new gold-gilded items in one photo. She used this to show a contrast with the pencil ask.

Why are Americans upset about the “Trump pencils” comment?

They face rising costs on food, rent, and energy. Asking for small sacrifices felt out of touch with real needs.

How did mockery harm Trump’s economic message?

Comedians and pundits ridiculed the pencil line and the gold decor. This mockery weakened his promise to fix inflation.

Key Takeaways:

• At a recent rally in Pennsylvania, Trump admitted using a harsh slur for certain nations.
• This admission contradicts his past denials about that word.
• MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski refused to repeat the slur on live TV.
• The moment reignites debate over his language and past reporting.

In a sparsely attended rally in Pennsylvania, former President Donald Trump surprised viewers. He openly admitted he used a vulgar slur to describe some foreign countries. Until now, Trump denied ever using that word. However, his new remarks clash with past pushback against earlier reports. MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski both expressed shock and refused to repeat the slur on live TV. This shift has fueled a fresh wave of criticism and questions about his honesty. The Trump slur admission marks a turning point in how people view his language.

Understanding the Trump Slur Admission Moment

During the rally, Trump spoke bluntly about news reports that claimed he used a derogatory term. He said he did use the phrase. This confession surprised many. Previously, he and his team denied those reports. As a result, the Trump slur admission now undercuts years of denials. Moreover, this change forces journalists and critics to rethink how they handle his statements. They must decide what to call this new admission. Additionally, some wonder if this moment will change public opinion as the 2024 election approaches.

What Happened at the Rally?

The event took place in Pennsylvania before a small crowd. Trump talked about immigration and foreign aid. Then, he turned to past news stories. He admitted he used the insulting word to describe people from Haiti, El Salvador, and parts of Africa. Until now, he denied it. Yet, at the rally, he paused and let viewers know the report was true. He did not apologize for it. Instead, he seemed to own the language he used. Consequently, critics say this moment reveals his true views on other countries.

Historical Context of the Slur

In January 2018, reports said Trump used the same word during a meeting on immigration. Some senators were present. They opposed aid to Haiti and other nations. The Washington Post first broke the story. However, Trump denied using that word. He claimed his language was misunderstood. His team insisted the report was false. Yet, several witnesses backed the Post’s claim. Since then, debate swirled over his language. This history matters because the new rally admission links back to those earlier denials. It shows how a single word can shape public trust.

Mika Brzezinski’s On-Air Refusal

Later that day, MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski addressed the topic. When a video clip showed Trump’s words, she pushed back. She said she could not bring herself to repeat the slur on air. Moreover, she noted how shocking it was that Trump would admit this on live stage. Brzezinski explained the power of words. She warned that public figures must choose language carefully. Many viewers praised her stand. They saw it as a strong statement against hate speech.

Why the Admission Matters

The Trump slur admission matters for several reasons. First, it contradicts his past denials. For years, Trump claimed he never used that word. Now, he says he did. Second, admitting the slur may affect his support among some voters. People who disliked the insult may view him more harshly. Third, this moment highlights how media handles sensitive speech. Hosts and reporters must decide if they will use the word to inform people. They also must weigh the harm of repeating it.

Furthermore, this admission raises questions about accountability. Leaders often claim they misspeak. Yet, here Trump confirmed the exact phrase. Consequently, critics argue that he must face the fallout. They say the language reflects bias against certain nations. Supporters counter that the remark was simply unfiltered truth. In any case, the Trump slur admission has altered the discussion around his character.

Public Reaction and Fallout

After Trump made his remarks public, social media lit up. Many users posted clips of the rally. Some voiced outrage. Others defended Trump’s honesty. They said it was good he finally admitted the truth. Yet, critics called his language racist and harmful. Several watchdog groups urged news outlets to label the slur as hate speech. Additionally, some politicians weighed in. A few Republicans distanced themselves from Trump’s choice of words. They said they did not approve of such language.

At the same time, Trump supporters saw the moment as a demonstration of his willingness to speak plainly. They praised him for rejecting political correctness. Meanwhile, independent analysts asked if this could shift the narrative around his candidacy. As the 2024 race heats up, moments like this may define voter opinions. Questions now emerge about whether Trump’s base will view this as honesty or hate speech.

Moreover, global leaders reacted. They expressed concern over the insult aimed at their nations. Some diplomats called for an apology. They argued that respect among countries depends on diplomatic language. Lastly, news outlets debated if they should bleep or fully quote the slur. This debate ties back to journalistic ethics and the impact of offensive words.

Impact on Campaign and Public Trust

Since the Trump slur admission, campaign advisers have scrambled. They worry the slip will define his next bid. Some donors paused fundraising calls. For example, a major fundraiser said they might rethink donations. Meanwhile, rival candidates pointed to this moment to question his statesmanship. Pollsters now ask voters if the slur changes their view. Initial results show a small shift among moderate voters. However, hardline supporters say the remark confirms his straight talk. Thus, the Trump slur admission deepens the divide between different voter blocs.

Trust plays a key role in elections. When a leader denies an insult but later admits it, trust erodes. Voters wonder what else they might later learn. Moreover, this incident may affect swing states. Those regions often have diverse populations. They could view the slur as a sign of disrespect. Consequently, the campaign must address this episode. They might release statements or hold town halls. Regardless, the impact on public trust will shape the race ahead.

Looking Ahead

Moving forward, the Trump slur admission will shape media debates. Journalists must choose how to handle direct quotes of harmful language. Also, politicians must address the issue in future campaigns. The word itself may become a symbol of larger concerns about hate speech. Moreover, voters will ask what this moment says about a leader’s character. Ultimately, the admission may influence both news coverage and election results. Therefore, we must watch how the story evolves in the coming weeks. In fact, this moment might appear in campaign ads on both sides.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did Trump admit at the rally?

He admitted he used a harsh slur to describe people from Haiti, El Salvador, and some African countries.

Why did Mika Brzezinski refuse to repeat the slur?

She felt it was too offensive and harmful to say on live television.

How does the admission affect Trump’s credibility?

The admission undermines his past denials and may change how people view his honesty.

Will news outlets now handle similar statements differently?

Yes, they may take a tougher stance on repeating or labeling hate speech as such.