Authored by Clayton Baker, MD, via The Brownstone Institute,

The prime directive of Western medicine, its golden rule, is expressed by the Latin maxim primum non nocere – first, do no harm. Unfortunately, the Covid era taught us that from the patient’s point of view, a better motto for our times might be caveat emptor – let the buyer beware.

Every medical student is taught that, first and foremost, they should not cause harm to their patients, and every doctor is familiar with this maxim. It is echoed in the Hippocratic Oath, and it forms the basis for the four pillars of medical ethics: autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice.

This rule, and the core tenets of medical ethics that it underpins, were all abandoned during the Covid era. They were replaced with a brutal, inhumane, and unethical martial-law-as-public-health approach to medicine. The results were unconstitutional lockdowns, prolonged school closures, suppression of early treatment, mandated vaccinations, and silencing of dissenting views. These abuses were justified by constant propaganda and lies from public health authorities, the medical establishment, the mainstream media, and medical professional associations.

Enter the American Academy of Pediatrics.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is the largest professional association for pediatricians in the United States. Nearly one hundred years old, the AAP’s motto is “Dedicated to the Health of All Children.” But as with so much of the medical establishment, the Covid era revealed that the AAP has abandoned its stated mission, and in the process, it has betrayed children everywhere.

During the Covid era, no group was harmed more – or more unnecessarily – than children, who lost multiple years of education, socialization, and normal growth and development. Many millions of kids also received the fraudulently tested, toxic, experimental mRNA-based injections that were coercively imposed upon the population at large. Countless children have been harmed or killed by these products, with myocarditis being only the most universally acknowledged of the many toxicities associated with the shots.

Adding insult to injury, it was known from the beginning of the pandemic that the gain-of-function-produced SARS-CoV-2 virus affected children very mildly, rarely causing severe illness, and almost never killing them. Even at the height of the pandemic, an article in the preeminent journal Nature described pediatric Covid deaths as “incredibly rare.” A very large population-based Korean study from 2023 found the case-fatality rate in children from Covid to be well under 1 death in every 100,000 cases. 

If no segment of the population was harmed more egregiously than children during the Covid era, few medical organizations betrayed their patient population more thoroughly than the American Academy of Pediatrics.

While the AAP has for many years taken questionable stances on a variety of issues, including the ever-enlarging pediatric vaccine schedule, “gender reassignment,” and others, at one early point during Covid, the AAP did attempt to advocate appropriately in the interest of children. It didn’t last long, however, and a review of this incident shows how the AAP, like so many other medical professional organizations, effectively sold its soul during Covid.

Summer 2020: The AAP Changes Its Tune on In-School Learning

From mid-March 2020, when the Covid lockdowns began, until the end of that school year in June, most American schoolchildren had been kept completely out of school. On July 9, 2020, the AAP released a statement arguing forcefully for the return of American schoolchildren back:

The AAP strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school. The importance of in-person learning is well-documented, and there is already evidence of the negative impacts on children because of school closures in the spring of 2020.

The July AAP statement went on to say that school closure “places children and adolescents at considerable risk of morbidity and, in some cases, mortality.” It went even further to state that:

the preponderance of evidence indicates that children and adolescents are less likely to be symptomatic and less likely to have severe disease resulting from SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, children may be less likely to become infected and to spread infection.

All of these claims the AAP made in July 2020 were known to be true to those who did the proper research (as the AAP apparently had done), and they have been repeatedly and definitively confirmed in the following years.

I was acutely aware of that July 9, 2020, AAP statement. I used it as an important resource in my own advocacy during the summer of 2020 to try to get schools reopened for full-time learning in New York State by the fall. The July AAP document was a well-researched, well-constructed, and well-argued advocacy tool that supported all children’s best interests.

So far, so good. Very soon thereafter, however, the AAP shamefully succumbed to pressure from public health officials, teachers’ unions, and others pushing for continued school closures. By August 19, 2020, with school reopening imminent, the AAP suddenly “revised” their recommendations. The AAP dramatically changed its tune, stating that they would go along with whatever measures public health officials decreed:

…many schools where the virus is widespread will need to adopt virtual lessons and [AAP] is calling for more federal funding to support both models.

“This is on us – the adults – to be doing all the things public health experts are recommending to reduce the spread of the virus,” said AAP President Sara “Sally” H. Goza, M.D., FAAP.

In an act of cowardice and dereliction of duty, the AAP surrendered. It abandoned the strong and sound advocacy for normalizing children’s education contained in its July document. As a physician actively following the issues of the day surrounding Covid and publicly fighting for school reopening, I can testify that nothing changed regarding our knowledge of the virus that justified the AAP’s abdication of its responsibility to children. In fact, multiple foreign countries had already returned children to school without ill effect. The AAP’s capitulation significantly undermined school reopening efforts, especially in Blue states.

The AAP’s sudden and craven volte-face regarding in-school learning was just one of many disgraceful acts committed by medical associations during the Covid era, and it acted to the severe harm of schoolchildren across the nation. Millions of American schoolchildren continued to languish in “remote” or “hybrid” learning for the entire 2020-2021 school year. Many thousands simply dropped out of school, never to return. 

In retrospect, the AAP cannot claim that they “didn’t know” enough to push for school reopening. Their July 2020 document proves they knew the correct course of action – before caving in to the establishment’s false narrative, and then subsequently devolving into just one more shameless shill organization, pushing for the mass inoculation of children with the toxic Covid mRNA injections. 

Why would the AAP have done such a thing?

Money, for one thing. And plenty of it.

The AAP’s Federal Funding Windfall During Covid

As the Covid vaccine push intensified, the AAP became one of the trusted legacy medical associations that was handsomely rewarded to “push vaccines and combat ‘Misinformation’.” By 2023, the year for which data is most available, the AAP was absolutely raking it in.

As journalist Michael Nevradakis explains:

AAP… received $34,974,759 in government grants during the 2023 fiscal year, according to the organization’s most recent tax disclosure. The grants are itemized in the AAP’s single audit report for 2023-2024.Documents show some of the money was used to advance childhood vaccination in the U.S. and abroad, target medical “misinformation” and “disinformation” online, [and] develop a Regional Pediatric Pandemic Network.

In summary: in July 2020, the AAP ever-so-briefly and correctly sided with the lockdown dissenters, in service of its self-proclaimed motto to serve “the health of all children.”

But by mid-August, the AAP switched sides and subsequently got a massive payout to do so.

In fiscal 2023 alone, the AAP was receiving $35 million of tax money, much of it directly tied to pushing the Covid mRNA shots in children and to silence dissenters, whom it knew were telling the truth.

Unfortunately, this is unsurprising. Years before Covid, the AAP had already morphed into a highly compromised organization, straying far from its stated goal of being “dedicated to the health of all children.”

The Dinosaurs Sell Themselves to Survive

The business model for the old establishment medical professional organizations, like the AAP, is a dinosaur. The value of paid membership to these organizations has disappeared over the years, causing income from membership fees to fall. Individual paid subscriptions to their flagship journals have nosedived as well. Their financial survival increasingly relies upon Big Pharma largesse and, as we saw above for the AAP during Covid, government payouts. 

In return for Big Pharma and government money, these professional organizations function less and less as champions for their professional members and their patients. They become mouthpieces for government initiatives and advertisers for Pharma. If you’ll pardon the mixed metaphor, they have become a strange species of dinosaur-prostitutes.

The AAP in particular is deeply tied to and heavily subsidized by Big Pharma, especially in the area of vaccine promotion.

Starting with the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA), which effectively eliminated tort liability for vaccine manufacturers, the CDC pediatric vaccine schedule has ballooned from 7 vaccines in 1985 to 23 vaccines (and over 70 total doses!) in 2024. Since then, the AAP has largely been in the vaccine promotion business.

In accordance with the CDC vaccine schedules, the Federal government purchases huge quantities of the recommended vaccines from pharmaceutical companies. The shots are promoted to the public and to physicians through well-paid organizations like the AAP, and administered by pediatricians, many of whom receive payment – essentially kickbacks – to do so. Every step of the way, palms are greased.

As a result, American children have become what Dr. Meryl Nass calls “a delivery system to transfer taxpayer funds to big pharmaceutical companies, via your child or grandchild’s arm.” 

As HHS Secretary Kennedy recently noted, the AAP posts on its own website its financial indebtedness to its corporate “donors.” Lo and behold, the four top vaccine manufacturers for the products on the pediatric vaccine schedule – Merck, Pfizer, Moderna, and Sanofi – stand at the top of the AAP’s corporate “donor” list. (The total amounts of the payouts the AAP receives are not disclosed.)

The AAP, originally created a century ago to advocate for pediatricians and their patients, has devolved into an advertiser and lobbyist for the corporate interests that fund their operations. So much for “dedicated to the health of all children.”

The AAP Goes All-In Against Reform

Fast forward to the present. The second Trump Administration and its reconstituted Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., are attempting to implement much-needed reforms to the corrupt and thoroughly captured Federal regulatory systems for healthcare.

HHS has begun to review and revise the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommended vaccine schedules, including the pediatric schedule. As mentioned above, since the passage of the NCVIA, which provided broad legal immunity to vaccine manufacturers, the pediatric schedule has exploded, from 7 recommended shots in 1986 to an incredible 23 in 2024. For over 3 decades, the AAP has agreed with the recommendations of the CDC with regard to the recommended pediatric vaccines, without argument.

Absolutely no cumulative safety testing for this bloated schedule has ever been performed, and products based on the highly controversial mRNA platform, including annual recommended shots for Covid, have recently been added to the schedule. The CDC pediatric schedule is much larger than those of most other developed countries, many of which boast significantly better pediatric (and general population) health than the United States.

Kennedy’s HHS replaced the members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) that reviews vaccines for the schedules, due to documented conflicts of interest that many prior members were found to have.

In May 2025, Kennedy’s HHS announced changes to the Covid-19 vaccination recommendations for children. The changes are in fact modest. Regarding the Covid shots, CDC currently recommends “shared clinical decision-making” between parents and providers for healthy children ages 6 months to 17 years.

How has the American Academy of Pediatrics responded? With actions so blatantly pro-Pharma, and so spitefully anti-parent, anti-patient, and anti-child, that their August 2020 betrayal of schoolchildren seems like, well, child’s play in comparison.

On July 28, 2025, in its flagship journal Pediatrics, the AAP released a policy statement calling for a nationwide end to all religious and other nonmedical exemptions for all mandated vaccinations for children, announcing “The AAP advocates for the elimination of nonmedical exemptions from immunizations as contrary to optimal individual and public health.”

Note that the AAP calls for a blanket ban. It makes no distinction between different vaccines, different educational settings, or different reasons for seeking exemptions. According to the AAP, all mandated vaccines are equally essential to both “individual and public health.” All nonmedical exemptions are totally invalid. 

The lead author of the policy statement, one Dr. Jesse Hackell, told MedpageToday that

“We recognize that excluding a child from public education does have problems, and yet, we reach the conclusion that, on balance, assuring the safety of the school and daycare environment outweighs that risk because there are other educational opportunities available.”

What an appalling shift in the AAP’s attitude toward in-school learning. What happened to their July 2020 stance, when barring kids from school “places children and adolescents at considerable risk of morbidity and, in some cases, mortality?” 

The AAP’s message to parents and children is crystal clear. They don’t give a damn about your beliefs, your personal autonomy, your Constitutional rights, or even your well-being. You want to go to school? Shut up, line up, and take the shots we tell you to take. Every last one of them. On August 19, 2025, the AAP released its own pediatric vaccination schedule, which is at variance with the Kennedy HHS’s current schedule. The AAP’s website states:

“The biggest difference between the AAP and CDC schedules is around COVID-19 vaccination. The CDC no longer recommends routine vaccination for healthy children, although children can get vaccinated after a conversation with their doctor. In contrast, the AAP recommends all young children ages 6-23 months get vaccinated.”

It is telling that after decades of placid agreement with the CDC as the pediatric vaccine schedule continually expanded, the AAP has decided to take the drastic step of releasing its own childhood vaccination schedule, at variance with the CDC’s, over the issue of “shared decision-making.” Apparently, only slavish adherence to mandatory vaccination suffices for the AAP.

This is the AAP’s stance, despite rapidly declining uptake of the Covid shots in the population, the miniscule risk of Covid to children, and the mountains of evidence building that demonstrate the toxicity of these shots. In addition to myocarditis, peer-reviewed studies are demonstrating numerous autoimmune and immune system toxicities in children receiving these shots. Michael Nevradakis lists some of these:

According to a peer-reviewed study published in Pediatric Rheumatology in May, children and adolescents who received at least one Covid-19 vaccine had a 23% higher risk of developing autoimmune disease compared to unvaccinated children.

A study published in the journal Immunity, Inflammation and Disease in April found that young adults who received a Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine showed elevated spike protein production a year or more after vaccination — significantly longer than the spike protein was expected to remain in the body.Children ages 5-11 who received two doses of Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine had heightened levels of a type of antibody suggestive of an altered immune system response one year after vaccination, according to a peer-reviewed study published last year in the Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal.

Regarding the Covid injections and the CDC vaccine schedule in general, the AAP holds a weak hand, and yet their leadership is going all-in anyway. The AAP’s insistence on annual Covid shots for children is absurd at best, and murderous at worst. As public relations, it appears arrogant, mercenary, and utterly tone deaf. Morally and ethically, it is indefensible.

The Betrayal Is Complete

The leadership at the American Academy of Pediatrics has apparently decided that they would rather torch any residual credibility on the altar of vaccinology than acknowledge any past or present mistakes, or suffer the pain of needed reform. In so doing, with their arrogant and grossly irresponsible attitude to the safety of children, they demonstrate that primum non nocere is not in their vocabulary, and that their motto “dedicated to the health of children” is, quite frankly, a lie.

Such destructive (and self-destructive) actions reveal the AAP’s near-total dependency on the vaccine industry, and its desperation to perpetuate that gravy train at any cost. The American Academy of Pediatrics has sold its soul. Sooner or later, the devil will come to collect.

The AAP’s deep betrayal of its stated core purpose is hardly unique. The AAP is just the poster child for the corruption and corporate capture that have consumed other legacy medical professional associations (the American Medical Association and the American College of Gynecology come to mind). 

The Federal Government must stop all funding to medical professional organizations like the AAP. This was always bound to corrupt them, and hard experience has demonstrated that it has. Furthermore, these organizations should be prohibited from accepting Pharma largesse, or at the very least be required to publicly disclose all income from such sources.

Perhaps some of these organizations will choose to reform. Public admission of past wrongdoing, complete divestiture of all Pharma support, and eliminating government subsidy would be the essential, bare-minimum steps to re-establishing independence and credibility. 

More likely, the dinosaurs will be replaced by a species of smaller, independent, and uncompromised organizations that incorporate safeguards against the corruption that destroyed their predecessors.

Any legacy medical professional organizations that do not thoroughly and sincerely reform do not deserve the support of physicians, credibility in the eyes of the public, or trust of patients. May they go the way of the dinosaur.

A hacker allegedly exploited Anthropic, the fast-growing AI startup behind the popular Claude chatbot, to orchestrate what authorities describe as an “unprecedented” cybercrime campaign targeting nearly 20 companies, according to a report released this week.

The report, published by Anthropic and obtained by NBC News, details how the hacker manipulated Claude to pinpoint companies vulnerable to cyberattacks. Claude then generated malicious code to pilfer sensitive data and cataloged information that could be used for extortion, even drafting the threatening communications sent to the targeted firms.

NBC News reports:

The stolen data included Social Security numbers, bank details and patients’ sensitive medical information. The hacker also took files related to sensitive defense information regulated by the U.S. State Department, known as International Traffic in Arms Regulations.

It’s not clear how many of the companies paid or how much money the hacker made, but the extortion demands ranged from around $75,000 to more than $500,000, the report said.

Jacob Klein, head of threat intelligence for Anthropic, said the campaign appeared to be the work of a hacker operating outside the U.S., but did not provide any additional details about the culprit.

“We have robust safeguards and multiple layers of defense for detecting this kind of misuse, but determined actors sometimes attempt to evade our systems through sophisticated techniques,” Klein said.

Anthropic’s findings come as an increasing number of malicious actors are leveraging AI to craft fraud that is more persuasive, scalable, and elusive than ever. A SoSafe Cybercrime Trends report reveals that 87% of global organizations encountered an AI-driven cyberattack over the past year, with the threat gaining momentum.

“AI is dramatically scaling the sophistication and personalization of cyberattacks,” said Andrew Rose, Chief Security Officer at SoSafe. “While organizations seem to be aware of the threat, our data shows businesses are not confident in their ability to detect and react to these attacks.”

Artificial intelligence is not only a tool for cybercriminals – it is also broadening the vulnerabilities within organizations. As companies rush to adopt AI-driven tools, they may inadvertently expose themselves to new risks.

“Even the benevolent AI that organisations adopt for their own benefit can be abused by attackers to locate valuable information, key assets or bypass other controls,” Rose continued.

“Many firms create AI chatbots to provide their staff with assistance, but few have thought through the scenario of their chatbot becoming an accomplice in an attack by aiding the attacker to collect sensitive data, identify key individuals and gather useful corporate insights,” he added.

Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

Authorities arrested 14 suspects they say stole $10 million in electrical equipment over several years in near-daily trips to Home Depot locations throughout Southern California, Ventura County officials announced on Aug. 26.

The theft ring is the largest organized retail theft case in Home Depot history, Sheriff Jim Fryhoff told reporters.

“The crew wasn’t just grabbing random items,” Fryhoff said.

The alleged thieves were highly organized and targeted Home Depot centers in Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties.

In all, 71 Home Depot stores were hit an estimated 600 times by the organized crime crew during their multi-year operation, according to authorities.

“They basically had been able to pull off over 600 different thefts from Home Depots in the surrounding counties,” Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said.

“They must have thought life was grand. They’ve been making millions of dollars; didn’t look like anyone was going to stop them.”

Law enforcement arrested 14 suspects on Aug. 14 and nine have been charged with multiple felonies, including organized retail theft, conspiracy, grand theft, money laundering, and receiving stolen property.

Those charged so far face sentences ranging from four to 32 years in state prison.

In February, Home Depot alerted Ventura County’s organized retail theft team about a rash of shoplifting offenses at their stores. The complex investigation led to more than 50 search warrants and an extensive surveillance operation.

The investigation led law enforcement to arrest 14 people allegedly connected to a sophisticated theft ring that was responsible for entering Home Depot stores, sometimes several times a day, and stealing expensive electrical equipment—including breakers, dimmers, switches, and outlets.

The shoplifters would start early in the morning, stuffing items in their clothing and reaching behind locked aisles, according to one video shown Aug. 26.

The alleged ringleader—David Ahl, 59—ran a storefront called ARIA Wholesale in Tarzana, according to Fryhoff.

14 suspects were arrested August 2025 in an organized retail crime bust in Ventura County, Calif. Ventura County Sheriff’s Department

Authorities say Ahl’s crew of thieves, known as boosters, would steal the merchandise and deliver it in trash bags or boxes to Ahl’s business or to his home, where he would allegedly pay them in cash.

Ahl would then allegedly sell the items at a reduced price to electrical contractors or other electrical businesses.

His brother-in-law, Omid Abrishamkar, 35, is accused of helping Ahl sell the stolen merchandise online on eBay or Amazon, according to Ventura County District Attorney Erik Nasarenko.

Ahl’s ex-wife, Lorena Solis, 54, and her boyfriend Enrique Felix Neira Moreno, 59, were also arrested on suspicion of running a nearly identical fencing operation of their own.

Teams of boosters, or thieves, were entering Home Depot stores and stealing between $6,000 and $10,000 each time, the sheriff reported.

These items were seized during the investigation into an organized crime ring that targeted Southern California Home Depot stores. Ventura County Sheriff’s Department

Investigators seized an estimated $3.7 million in Home Depot property during several searches, according to the sheriff.

“As the investigation continues, we expect that dollar amount will rise,” Fryoff said. “This case is ongoing and more arrests are likely.”

The suspects charged are Ahl, Erlin Anain Hernandez Lopez, 28, Denny Jose Hernandez Gomez, 43, Jose Benuelos Guerrero, 60, Eber Bonilla Lopez, 39, Abrishamkar, Edwin Villalvir Rivera, 32, Solis and Moreno.

Darlene Hermosillo, the asset protection manager for Home Depot, was thankful for the arrests.

“This theft was motivated by greed, not necessity, and was funding broader criminal activity,” Hermosillo said Aug. 26.

Retailers across the country are faced with retail organized crime that continues to grow, she added.

New Law on Thefts

Changes in California law within the past year allowed county district attorneys to coordinate and combine the thefts into one prosecution in Ventura County. Assembly Bill 1779, authored by Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin, a Democrat from Thousand Oaks, took effect on Jan. 1. The new law allows crimes that occur across multiple counties to be consolidated into a single filing.

Irwin joined authorities in the Aug. 26 press conference.

“The announcement of these charges here today should be a clear signal to organized thieves that the days of being able to steal and terrorize the residents of both Ventura and LA counties are over,” Irwin said.

The voter-approved Prop. 36, which took effect Dec. 18, also allowed prosecutors to consolidate the value of multiple thefts into one charge, allowing authorities to charge defendants with felonies and not misdemeanors, even if individual thefts fall below the felony threshold of $950.

President Donald Trump said during a Cabinet meeting earlier on Tuesday, “I think one of the most important things we’re doing at this table is bringing education back to the states, where parents and local school boards run it.”

.@POTUS: “I think it’s one of the most important things were doing at this table is bringing education BACK to the states where you have the parents running it, the local school boards…” pic.twitter.com/8FGOcfCLMy

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) August 26, 2025

This leads us to President Trump’s executive order earlier this year to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. At the time, the president pointed to an uncomfortable truth for Democrats running Baltimore City Schools and City Hall: 40% of public high schools have zero students proficient in math. That damning statistic came from Fox 45 investigative reporter Chris Papst’s coverage of Baltimore’s education crisis. 

For nearly eight years, ZeroHedge has followed Papst’s investigative work through the trenches of school to school across crime-ridden Baltimore City. Papst has conducted all the investigative work through Project Baltimore, in collaboration with Fox45 News. He has spent years reporting on optically displeasing headlines that merely expose how progressive elites in City Hall and in the local school system seemingly rob generations of children of a future for short-term gain to line their pockets and funnel taxpayer funds into the Democratic Party machine, which is nothing more than corrupt unions. 

Many of Papst’s reports have gone viral, including the 2023 report cited by President Trump, which revealed that 40% of Baltimore City high schools had zero students proficient in math. 

A fact is a fact.

Baltimore City Schools in 2023 had 13 high schools (40%) were ZERO students tested proficient in math. When Project Baltimore first reported that number, it went viral.

Now @realDonaldTrump is talking about it.

Link for details:https://t.co/9yWJxT4Oim

— Chris Papst (@chrispapst) March 22, 2025

In 2024, Baltimore City Schools operated on a $1.7 billion budget – yet only 10% of students tested proficient in math. In other words, 90% of students failed to meet basic standards, despite taxpayers dumping nearly $2 billion into the failing system. Put differently, the inability to educate the youth to achieve basic proficiency in math and other critical but basic subjects reflects the broader collapse of Baltimore itself. 

How can Baltimore expect to grow its economy, with a population collapse to a 100-year low, when public schools are churning out generation after generation of failures? It’s as if Democratic leaders are deliberately sabotaging the city’s youth to protect a broken system that enriches them while leaving children behind. This kind of madness needs to stop. Then again, Democrats in the state did embrace illegal aliens as a replacement for the future voting base.

Remember how far-left Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen prioritized this illegal alien over voters… The reason is very obvious. 

As the school year begins in the Baltimore-DC metro area, Papst’s new book, Failure Factory, sheds light on Baltimore’s public education crisis – an eye-opener, especially for the Trump administration, to understand how the city’s education collapse, marked by grade rigging, lowered academic standards, and manipulated violence data, is quite literally dooming the ‘American Dream’ for youngsters.

What’s happening in Baltimore City is quite literally everything the Democratic Party doesn’t want the nation to see: how corruption is prioritized, how the education of youth is sacrificed, all so local politicians and unions can continue lining their pockets.

The “failure factory” in Baltimore’s education system is not unique and is occurring in many other states, including another Deep Blue stronghold: Illinois…

This is no longer just about failing schools; it’s about national survival. For a nation to survive through the 2030s, the youth need to be educated and informed – not dumbed down and brainwashed with Marxist wokeism.

Many believe the lack of proper education in Baltimore fuels violent crime, drug crisis, and chaos across the city, some of which is fueled by the youth.

A few weeks ago, President Trump stated that Baltimore is “too far gone.”

When discussing the crime problem in several American cities, President Donald Trump mentioned Baltimore as a city that’s “so far gone.”

LATEST: https://t.co/sKgK0PokjM pic.twitter.com/3i7OwKNqyf

— FOX Baltimore (@FOXBaltimore) August 11, 2025

Failure Factory is a national warning and sends an urgent message to the Trump administration to push ahead with much-needed education reforms.

Trump also called Baltimore a “hellhole” earlier today…

🚨 LMAO! President Trump just clowned on Maryland Gov. Wes Moore for asking Trump to walk with him through Baltimore

“I am NOT walking in Baltimore right now. Baltimore is a HELLHOLE.”

“He’s another ‘candidate’ for President. Between him and Newscum… you have some real… pic.twitter.com/l0tEXvxJvO

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) August 26, 2025

He’s not wrong.

Authored by Evgenia Filimianova via The Epoch Times,

Denmark’s foreign minister said on Wednesday that foreign interference in the relationship between Greenland and Denmark is unacceptable, after the country’s main broadcaster, DR, citing unnamed government and security officials as well as unidentified sources in Greenland and the United States, reported that at least three Americans with ties to the White House and U.S. President Donald Trump have been conducting secret influence operations in Greenland.

Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen said in a statement that Denmark is aware that foreign actors continue to show interest in Greenland and its position within the Kingdom of Denmark.

“It is therefore not surprising if we experience outside attempts to influence the future of the Kingdom in the time ahead,” he said, adding that interference in Denmark’s internal affairs is unacceptable.

“In that light, I have asked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to summon the U.S. chargé d’affaires for a meeting at the Ministry.”

The Epoch Times contacted the U.S. mission in Copenhagen, currently headed by Chargé d’affaires Mark Stroh, for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

DR noted in its reporting that it had been unable to determine whether the men allegedly conducting the operations were acting independently or under orders and has not confirmed their names.

Rasmussen added that cooperation between Denmark and Greenland “is close and based on mutual trust.”

Strategic Importance of Greenland

Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory, controls its domestic affairs, while Denmark oversees defense and foreign policy. The island’s location in the Arctic makes it strategically important for monitoring North Pole security.

Trump previously proposed purchasing Greenland, an offer Denmark rejected. The U.S. president has said that U.S. control of the resource-rich island would bolster both national and international security, citing concerns about growing Chinese and Russian naval activity in the Arctic.

In March, U.S. Vice President JD Vance visited a U.S. Space Force base in Greenland, accusing Denmark of having “not done a good job by the people of Greenland.” The remark drew rebukes from officials in both Copenhagen and Nuuk, Greenland’s capital.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance and second lady Usha Vance eat a meal with soldiers at the U.S. military’s Pituffik Space Base in Pituffik, Greenland, on March 28, 2025. Jim Watson/Getty Images

Greenland also hosts a key U.S. military installation equipped with space surveillance and missile warning systems. During Trump’s first term, his administration sought to deepen ties with Greenland as part of efforts to counter Chinese and Russian influence in the Arctic.

Security Service Warns of Influence Campaigns

The Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET) said it believed that Greenland was currently a target for various influence campaigns aimed at creating divisions in the relationship between Denmark and Greenland.

The agency assessed that such efforts could be carried out by exploiting either existing or fabricated disagreements, “for example in connection with well-known individual cases, or by promoting or amplifying certain viewpoints in Greenland regarding the Kingdom, the United States, or other countries with a particular interest in Greenland.”

PET added that in recent years it had continuously strengthened its efforts and presence in Greenland in cooperation with local authorities, and that these measures would continue.

Closer US–Danish Military Ties

In June, Denmark passed legislation allowing the United States to station military bases on Danish soil, expanding a 2023 defense agreement that gave American forces wide access to Danish air bases.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen defended the move, saying it was essential to strengthen ties with Washington rather than risk pushing the United States away.

Greenland and Denmark also announced in April that they would move to solidify their alliance amid repeated U.S. statements about Greenland’s future. The display of unity followed talks in Copenhagen between Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen and Frederiksen.

Authored by Luis Cornelio via Headline USA,

The New York Times came under fire on Monday for running a hit piece against Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s pro-exercise campaign.

The leftist newspaper, as legacy media often does, leaned on so-called experts cautioning “against jumping into a difficult routine suggested by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Pete Hegseth.”

Its headline—100 Push-Ups and 50 Pull-Ups in Under 10 Minutes. What Could Go Wrong?—was predictably snarky.

The piece targeted the “Pete and Bobby Challenge,” a social media campaign aimed at raising awareness about fitness and weight loss.

However, according to The Times and their quoted experts, the exercise “may not be for everyone.”

“For the average person, I would definitely recommend building volume in these movements over three to four weeks before giving it a go,” said Utah athlete Dallin Pepper.

The leftist rag then cited Toronto-based personal trainer Chris Smits to say that the regimen proposed by Hegseth and Kennedy is not feasible for most Americans.

Citing experts is a common tactic in legacy media attacks on conservatives.

Self-described journalists pick a topic, guide the experts toward the conclusions they desire and then publish the story.

This cycle allows them to wash their hands by claiming they are simply reporting.

On X, critics piled on The Times, describing the hit piece as predictable as it was laughable.

“The New York Times really hates working out,” wrote Republican communicator Nathan Brand.

the New York Times really hates working out pic.twitter.com/m0lPBMnNnu

— Nathan Brand (@NathanBrandWA) August 26, 2025

Media personality Collin Rugg added: “The @TheBabylonBee couldn’t even come up with something as insane as this.”

The New York Times is warning against RFK Jr. & Pete Hegseth’s 100 Push-Ups & 50 Pull-Ups challenge by citing “experts” who say it could be dangerous.

One Canadian ‘trainer’ cited by the NYT said the challenge could give people “serious muscle strains or tears.”

“Pushing for… pic.twitter.com/H54RQhSPAb

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) August 25, 2025

Fitness expert Oliver Anwar quipped, “This is confirmation that The New York Times is run by low-T softies.”

Authored by Melanie Sun via The Epoch Times,

The federal government on Aug. 26 filed an application with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to suspend a court order that is preventing it from freezing billions in foreign aid.

President Donald Trump, on inauguration day, ordered a 90-day pause on all foreign aid.

His presidential order was met with legal challenges from two nonprofit groups that receive federal funding grants related to aid: the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Journalism Development Network.

They alleged that Trump’s funding freeze was unlawful.

The order directed federal agencies to “immediately pause new obligations and disbursements of development assistance funds to foreign countries and implementing non-governmental organizations” while the newly elected administration reviewed the programs to see if they were consistent with its America First foreign policy objectives.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio then outlined in a memorandum that he was freezing foreign-aid programs funded by the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Journalism Development Network were among those granted money from this pool of funding.

In an emergency filing, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer of the U.S. Department of Justice said on Aug. 26 that the administration’s position to overturn a federal court injunction had been supported 2–1 by the panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit earlier this month.

Despite that ruling, the injunction by a lower court remains in effect after U.S. District Judge Amir Ali in Washington on Aug. 25—and the federal appeals court last week—rejected the Justice Department’s request to put it on hold.

“The government is thus forced to ask this Court to give effect to the D.C. Circuit’s decision, which correctly held that private parties cannot enlist Article III courts to supplant the interbranch dialogue regarding the expenditure of appropriated funds,” Sauer said in his 36-page application to the Supreme Court.

The funds subject to the injunction comprise tens of billions of dollars, some $12 billion of which would need to be spent by the U.S. Department of State before Sept. 30, when they expire, according to the filing.

Without the court’s intervention, Sauer said, the State Department will be bound by the injunction to keep making the foreign aid payments before the expiry date.

The injunction “will effectively force the government to rapidly obligate some $12 billion in foreign-aid funds that would expire September 30 and to continue obligating tens of billions of dollars more—overriding the Executive Branch’s foreign-policy judgments regarding whether to pursue rescissions and thwarting interbranch dialogue,” Sauer said.

Disputes between the legislative and executive branches over federal funding have historically been determined through the political process, as codified by the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA).

“Yet the district court jumped ahead, appointing itself as overseer of spending decisions and allowing private parties to bring suits without regard to the Comptroller General or Congress’s views,” Sauer said.

The lower court decision effectively ruled that such private parties “could persuade district courts to superintend the Executive Branch’s disbursement of funding streams and second-guess the political branches’ views of the ICA,” the filing said.

Sauer said the plaintiffs face no irreparable harm from the federal government’s decision to freeze funding.

“They cannot claim irreparable harm from the unavailability of certain funding streams when they have no entitlement to those funds anyway,” the petition said.

“They simply want to compete for foreign-aid awards. But even under the injunction, they have no guarantee of getting a penny, making it all the more incongruous for them to effectively commandeer the spending of billions of dollars.”

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on March 5 to intervene after Ali ruled against the administration on Feb. 25.

The Supreme Court at the time asked Ali to “clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance” with his temporary restraining order.

Ali then determined it was likely the Trump administration was acting beyond its purview by canceling funds earmarked by Congress, and barred it from “unlawfully impounding congressionally appropriated foreign aid funds.”

The DOJ appealed, and the three-judge appeals panel stayed Ali’s order. The plaintiffs then appealed to the full court of appeals, which has yet to make its decision but has left Ali’s injunction in place.

Sauer has asked for its petition to be addressed by Sept. 2 “due to the additional irreparable harms the government would incur past that point.”

“Backtracking on those commitments and proposing rescissions after September 2 would inflict irreparable diplomatic costs and generate needless interbranch friction,” he said.

Apple announced on Tuesday that its upcoming “Awe Dropping” iPhone 17 event will take place on September 9. The launch is expected to feature an all-new super-thin iPhone, new Watch models with satellite connectivity, and the long-awaited AirPods Pro 3.

Ahead of the launch event, Goldman analysts led by Michael Ng told clients that his desk is “Buy” rated on the stock. 

“We are encouraged by reports surrounding (1) form factor updates to iPhone 17 models (17 “Air” model, larger base screen size); (2) the potential for a price increase to the iPhone 17 Pro; and (3) continued carrier competition driving device-related promotions,” Ng told clients. 

He stated, “We reiterate our Buy rating on AAPL and forecast iPhone revenue to grow +5% yoy in F2025E before accelerating to +7% yoy growth in F2026E.”

Ng expects four new iPhone models to be launched at the beginning of the iPhone 17 cycle:

1. iPhone 17 (base);

2. iPhone 17 “Air” (replacing the Plus model);

3. iPhone 17 Pro; and

4. iPhone 17 Pro Max.

So, what’s really changing with the new iPhone? Good question. The analyst provides some thoughts:

First, the iPhone 17 series will reportedly feature a variety of different form factor changes (Exhibit 1). For one, Apple should debut the first iPhone 17 “Air” model (which should replace the iPhone “Plus” model), featuring a thinner and lighter form factor relative to other iPhone models, with a display size between that of the 17 Pro (6.3″) and 17 Pro Max (6.9″). In addition, the iPhone 17 base model display size should now measure 6.3″ (v. 6.1″ in the base iPhone 16 model), now equal to that of Pro models. Second, the iPhone 17 series should be able to support greater compute intensity, with updated A19 series processor chips and 12 GB of RAM (v. 8GB RAM in the iPhone 16 family). iPhone 17 Pro & Pro Max models should feature premium chip models (likely A19 Pro), and the iPhone 17 (base) and Air models featuring a less advanced chip model (A19 base or less compute intensive A19 Pro). Greater chip power and RAM capacity likely reflects a greater need for compute intensity ahead of upcoming Apple Intelligence feature updates and releases, including the 2026 expected release of AI-enhanced Siri. Third, the iPhone 17 series should see an improved front camera (24 MP v. 12 MP in the iPhone 16 family).

Thoughts on pricing:

Though it has been reported that Apple could raise prices by $50 across its iPhone 17 line up, we expect pricing for iPhone 17 (base) and Pro Max models to be in-line with that of preceding models ($799 128GB base model starting price; $1,199 256GB Pro Max starting price). That said, we believe Apple could implicitly raise prices on the Pro model, in-line with recent reports. While the iPhone 16 Pro started at 128GB at $999, we believe Apple could raise prices by eliminating the 128 GB storage option, moving 17 Pro starting storage and price to 256 GB and $1,099. This would be similar to how Apple raised prices on Pro Max models in 2023 during the launch of the iPhone 15 series, when it eliminated the $1,099 128 GB storage option for the iPhone 15 Pro Max, moving the Pro Max model’s starting storage and price to 256 GB and $1,199. We expect iPhone 17 Air pricing to be relatively in-line with the iPhone 16 Plus ($899), due to its specialized thin form factor yet reported inferior battery capacity and single-lens back camera.

And what does the new iPhone mean for Apple’s revenue growth? Well, Ng has that topic covered as well:

Overall, we view the iPhone 17 line-up as supportive of sustaining iPhone revenue growth from F2025 into F2026 (GSe iPhone revenue growth estimates for +5% yoy in F2025E, +7% yoy in F2026E). First, from a demand standpoint, we view updates including larger screen sizes on the 17 base model, improved front-cameras, and improved processor chip power as supportive of device refresh, particularly amongst members of the iPhone installed base with devices that are aging (>3 years since purchase) or that do not support Apple Intelligence (devices less powerful than iPhone 15 Pro and 15 Pro Max) ahead of the launch of additional AI features in the coming year (AI-enhanced Siri). Second, from a price perspective, we view the potential for an implicit iPhone price increase through eliminating the 128GB $999 Pro model option as supportive of ASP uplift over time, particularly as the iPhone shipments skew increasingly premium over time (Exhibit 5). We are mixed on the benefits of the iPhone 17 Air model. While the thinner, lighter form factor may drive some demand interest, potential features such as an inferior battery & a single lens rear camera (vs. base model with 2 lenses & better camera) may not justify a purchase over the iPhone 17 base model.

Summary of key changes expected in iPhone 17 series

iPhone announcement event has not historically been a stock catalyst for outperformance/underperformance

Promotional activity among US carriers for iPhones 

iPhone 17 pricing 

iPhone revenue forecast 

Remaining product pipeline

How “Awe Dropping” will this upcoming launch event be if the iPhone 17 still looks the same as previous iPhone models? 

Authored by Michael Lebowitz via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

In his 1687 book, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, Sir Isaac Newton defined momentum as the product of mass and velocity, or p = m * v. The reason we begin with a physics lesson is that momentum strategies are very popular, and Isaac Newton’s famous formula can teach us a lot about financial asset momentum.

Recently, we have seen rapid shifts in and out of various sectors and stock factors that disrupt momentum strategies. Therefore, understanding how momentum strategies work can help you better identify when they might be effective and when it’s time to switch to a different approach.

The graphs used in this article are from 8/21/2025. Although slightly outdated, their goal is to help readers understand how to measure momentum rather than assess the current momentum state.

Physics 101

Returning to our basic physics formula, p = m * v.

To measure financial momentum, we also need to measure the velocity and mass of a financial asset or index.

Mass

Mass (m) in finance terminology refers to the trading volume or market interest behind an asset. Market cap or AUM, trading volumes, and investor sentiment can be used to measure mass.

The graph below, courtesy of SimpleVisor, highlights the bullish trend channel (blue) from late May through mid-August.

In this example, we will focus on three indicators to evaluate mass.

The first indicator is volume, along with its moving average. As indicated by the red and green bars, volume has remained steady throughout the trend. This is also supported by the relatively flat moving average (black line). Ideally, we want to see rising volume alongside a trend. However, volume isn’t decreasing either, which would suggest the trend is losing momentum.

The middle graph is On Balance Volume (OBV). OBV adds volume on days when a security’s price closes higher and subtracts volume when it closes lower. Therefore, it shows a running total of buying or selling pressure. Ideally, we want to see it increasing. Like we noted with volume, which is also flat, OBV momentum isn’t gaining strength, but it doesn’t indicate that momentum is declining either. 

The bottom graph shows the Volume Oscillator, which compares a shorter and a longer moving average of volume. When it declines, it indicates that volume over the shorter moving average period is less than that of the more extended period. As shown above, the oscillator has been declining, though at a slow rate.

None of the volume indicators suggest a break in the momentum trend is imminent, but they also don’t indicate the trend is gaining strength. 

Velocity

Velocity (v) quantifies the persistence of the trend and its slope.

Let’s revisit the graph above with three popular indicators of velocity.

The graph shows the Moving Average Convergence Divergence, or MACD. The MACD is computed by subtracting a longer-term moving average from a shorter-term one. Additionally, a signal line, an even shorter moving average, accompanies the MACD. We examine not only the trend and level of the MACD but also convergences or divergences from the signal line. A convergence indicates a weakening trend, while divergence suggests increasing momentum. In the graph, the MACD remains stable with no apparent signs of convergence or divergence. Although generally bullish, the MACD level is high, which is difficult to sustain, and it has been gradually sloping downward.

The indicator just below the price chart is the Relative Price Index, or RSI. The RSI is an oscillator that measures the speed and magnitude of price movements. The index ranges from 100, which signals it’s very overbought, to 0, indicating it is very oversold. Typically, levels above 75 and below 25 suggest a reversal in momentum is likely. Equally important is the trend of the RSI line. Like most indicators, we prefer a gently rising or falling trend over sharp movements. Currently, after reaching overbought levels in late July, the RSI has generally been declining, showing that momentum is weakening.

Last is the Rate of Change (ROC). The ROC calculation shows the percentage difference between the current price and an earlier price. An ROC of zero, as indicated by the graph, means the price has not changed compared to 9 days ago. ROC should be above zero in an uptrend and below zero in a downtrend. However, during healthy market consolidations, the ROC can reach zero. In such cases, breaking below zero could coincide with breaking the highlighted price channel and a change in momentum.

What Is p?

Before moving on, let’s review the momentum of the S&P 500 based on the indicators and charts above. The highlighted trend channel, along with the mass and velocity indicators, suggests a market with positive momentum. Both sets of indicators are indicating some easing of momentum but not warning of an upcoming reversal. As we mentioned earlier, it’s healthy to experience brief periods of correction or consolidation in strong upward trends. So far, we should assume this is the case until our indicators and the price chart indicate otherwise.

Pitfalls of Momentum Strategies

Momentum strategies depend on the persistence of price trends and indicators that measure those trends, some of which are described above. When markets undergo significant two-way volatility or rapid rotations with market leadership shifting quickly between sectors and/or stock factors, momentum strategies often face difficulties.

The biggest problem with the strategy is its delayed reaction. Because momentum strategies rely on past price data, trends may reverse or fade before the strategy can fully take advantage of them, resulting in whipsaw losses. Additionally, the model might not detect a new momentum trend until it is well into the cycle, leaving little upside potential.

Another important factor is time. If you plan to follow a momentum strategy, you must decide whether you’re a short-term trader or a medium- or long-term investor. A short-term trader might use minute-by-minute data to capitalize on momentum trends over hours or days. Long-term traders, on the other hand, need to focus on the bigger picture. Naturally, the scope of that picture depends on how long-term an investor you are.

Mitigating Data Lag

When markets are volatile and rotations occur quickly, momentum can still be effective. Still, strategies need to adjust to the environment. For example, you may want to use shorter lookback periods to capture momentum changes more quickly.

Another practical step is diversification. Instead of depending on just one or two sectors, factors, or stocks with strong momentum, think about broadening your portfolio. This can help reduce the volatility of your returns. Additionally, including other value factors, such as market capitalization, beta, or value versus growth, alongside the momentum indicator, can result in more stable outcomes.

Summary

Momentum strategies give investors the chance for higher returns than the market. Additionally, momentum can be fairly easily measured, allowing investors to use a rule-based system, which can help reduce the influence of emotions on trading decisions.

Momentum strategies, like all other investment strategies, have periods when they perform well and periods when they underperform. For example, during periods of quick rotations where momentum trends are not sustained and volatility is high, investors can often find themselves on the wrong side of momentum.

We leave you with the graph below.

Since 2022, the performance of a widely followed momentum ETF (MTUM) has matched the S&P 500 (SPY). However, the blue shading indicates that although both ended up in the same place, the strategy experienced periods of outperformance and equally poor periods of underperformance.

Renewed high-level scrutiny on far-left nonprofits emerged overnight with a New York Times report on Tuesday evening, which revealed that the Gates Foundation had abruptly severed ties with a “dark money” network operated by Arabella Advisors. Then by morning, President Trump fired off a post on Truth Social calling for possible RICO charges against George Soros and his radical leftist son for their “support of violent protests.” We must note that Bill Gates met with Trump at the White House earlier on Tuesday, according to an NBC report. 

The move by the Gates Foundation, along with Trump’s comments, suggests that an impending crackdown on rogue progressive philanthropic networks could arrive as early as this fall. 

Additional evidence of this scrutiny surfaced actually last week, Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) sounded the alarm on X. Cotton singled out the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), a leftist activist group closely aligned with Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), accusing it of working across university campuses to incite anti-Israel protests and campus chaos.

“The Palestinian Youth Movement’s support of Hamas and ties to terror groups should prevent it from receiving tax-exempt donations. I’m asking the IRS to investigate and remedy this situation,” Cotton wrote on X last Friday. 

The Palestinian Youth Movement’s support of Hamas and ties to terror groups should prevent it from receiving tax exempt donations. I’m asking the IRS to investigate and remedy this situation. https://t.co/dmCimJObgM

— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) August 22, 2025

Cotton sent a letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, requesting that the IRS investigate PYM and its funding sources for potential violations of U.S. tax law.

Cotton emphasized that while PYM is known for antisemitic activities and support for terrorist groups like Hamas, the core issue is its ability to receive tax-exempt donations…

“An organization that supports terrorism, breaks U.S. law, and sows antisemitic discord should not receive any benefits from the American tax system. I ask you to immediately investigate both PYM and Honor the Earth and to take any actions necessary to remedy this situation,” Cotton wrote in the letter. 

Commentary on PYM via Jason Curtis Anderson, cofounder of the good government group One City Rising, reveals: 

“One of the basic qualifications for tax-exempt 501(c)(3) charity status is that an organization must actually work for the public good. The Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM) is an international terror-supporting network that doesn’t even pretend to contribute anything positive to society. Last year’s People’s Conference for Palestine in Detroit—the largest pro-terror conference in U.S. history—was sponsored, convened, and managed by PYM, which also served as the primary recipient of donations. Its speaker lineup included current PFLP member Wisam Rafeedie, Sana’ Daqqa—the wife of convicted PFLP terrorist Walid Daqqa—and even a promotional endorsement from PFLP founding member Salah Salah. With another conference looming in 2025, it is unacceptable that groups openly glorifying terrorism enjoy the same tax-exempt privileges as organizations that truly serve the public good, like feeding the homeless. The 501(c)(3) world has become the Wild West of government subversion, permanent protests, and foreign influence, and I applaud Senator Tom Cotton’s much-needed efforts to put a stop to this rampant abuse.” 

Takeaway is clear: The days of dynastic billionaire families, foreign money, taxpayer dollars, and leftist nonprofits feeding the Democratic Party machine are about to come under the crosshairs and face heavy scrutiny this fall. Americans are sick and tired of rogue leftist NGOs unleashing color-revolution-style operations across major cities, if that’s rioting, burning private property, and attacking government facilities. We also suspect the Marxists around Neville Roy Singham have been put on notice.