NORMAN J CLEMENT , RPH, DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., INC.T. SPIRIT OF REV. IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER R. CLEMENT BS., MS, MBA. HARVEY JENKINS MD, PH.D., IN THE SPIRIT OF C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., MBA., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., EVELYN J. CLEMENT, WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGSWORTH, RENEE BLARE, RPH, DR. TERENCE SASAKI, MD LESLY POMPY MD., CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., RICHARD KAUL, MD., LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NJOKU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
Think about it, People…On Kolodny and Prop…, the DOJ has adopted eugenics or Neo-Eugenics. As David SteinMD put it, they’ve resurrected and repackaged the old eugenic philosophy so that history doesn’t repeat itself, but it, sure enough, rhymes.….@marktwain
of lies and deceptions
The Powers of Abuse Gone Unchecked
Career Hunting For Big Game (Rashid in the Hood or Rashid MD)
DEA and HHS, HHS-OIG introduce false evidence into criminal trials, violating Napue and Alcorta, through their biased, unproven, pseudoscientific, junk science, data analytic, and criminal forensic tools. See In re Richards, 63 Cal. 4th 291, 315 (2016) (court granting civil writ of habeas corpus ruling bite mark expert’s criminal trial testimony constituted material false evidence).
DEA and HHS commit Constitutional violations against “suspect class” healthcare professionals for the pecuniary benefit of the DEA, HHS, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, and/or the HFPP “Cartel”. “Since Daubert, traditional forms of criminal forensic evidence, such as bite marks, handwriting, hair samples, and fingerprints, have been admitted routinely, bypassing the rigorous methodology scrutiny that applies to, for example, epidemiological and toxicological causation evidence in civil products liability and toxic tort cases.
As one commentator concluded, “[j]udicial scrutiny in civil litigation and judicial passivity in criminal litigation is aligned with the repeat-player dynamic unique to each forum.” Corporate defendants in civil cases routinely challenge the faulty forensic evidence used against them, pushing judges to be more skeptical in civil proceedings. By contrast, prosecutors consistently introduce the same evidence in criminal cases, encouraging judges in criminal proceedings to rely on precedent.
A TIME OF MEDICAL EMERGENCY, NATIONAL MEDICAL ASSOCIATION TAKES ON POLITE’S OPIOID TASKS FORCE LEGITIMACY
Over time, this has created a discrepancy in how trial judges rule on scientific evidence in civil versus criminal settings that cannot be explained by a difference in substantive law or the applicable rules of evidence.” See United States v. Havvard, where the court described Sherwood as an opinion “asserting that the reliability of fingerprint comparisons cannot be questioned.” 260 F.3d 597, 600 (7th Cir. 2001).
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN
THE NORMS
REFERENCE:
DONATE TO SUPPORT THE DEFENSE OF HEALTH CARE TRUTH
SEND$100, $250, $500
TO ZELLE 3135103378 OR CASH APP:$docnorm
