from youarewithinthenorms.com
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., 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., M.B.A., 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., IN THE SPIRIT OF LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, AISHA GARDNER, 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
“… laws DESIGNED IN VAGUENESS ARE DELIBERATELY DESIGNED TO BE INTERPRETED EITHER way…”
from docnorm’s rule number #5., norman j clement,rph., dds
allegations, and why is its vagueness a legal concern?
In healthcare fraud cases, the government must allege a material, objectively false representation and an intent to deceive. The concept of “medical necessity” is frequently central to these allegations.
However, for such a term to be legally sound in a criminal indictment, it must be tied to “clear, objective benchmarks” to avoid unconstitutional vagueness (United States v. Paulus, 2018).
If an indictment repeatedly claims treatments were “medically unnecessary” without specifying violations of established clinical guidelines (e.g., Pennsylvania’s specialty-specific guidelines under 49 Pa. Code § 16.92), deviations from FDA-approved uses, or contradictions of peer-reviewed literature, it becomes unconstitutionally vague.
This vagueness violates a physician’s due process rights, as they lack fair notice of what conduct is prohibited, forcing them to guess at the meaning of the standard (Johnson v. United States, 2015; United States v. Davis, 2019).
Algorithmic Legal Plunder: The New Tyranny
Dr. Neil Anand warns us in his August 7th article, “90 Seconds to Midnight: Humanity Approaches the Omega Point with the Birth of General Artificial Intelligence (ChatGPT-5.0)” published in the Blog Doctors of Courage;
” In this strange hour of American human history, when social media algorithms recommend our thoughts, wars are waged with drones, and artificial intelligence neural networks whisper into the architecture of our laws, America finds itself on a spiritual ledge.
..In The Law (1850), Frédéric Bastiat warned of legal plunder, the use of law to take from some and give to others under a veneer of legitimacy…
…Today, artificial intelligence algorithms have become its most sophisticated instrument…This legalized plunder pattern extends beyond healthcare. Credit scoring models that disadvantage specific zip codes. School funding formulas that reward districts with political connections. “Objective” algorithms whose statistical fingerprints reveal systematic bias. Each appears neutral, each enacts legal plunder on a massive scale...”
GOOD ADVOCATES VERSUS CORPORATE TECHNOCRATS
And the United States, for all its chaos, is barreling toward it, dragging humanity along with it.
But here’s the existential question: Who gets to design the final interface between freedom and superintelligence?
Will it be corporate technocrats with godlike tools and no philosophy?
Or will we arm artificial intelligence with the only doctrine that guards against spiritual totalitarianism, which is Bastiat’s law of liberty?
Beneath us, a complex, turbulent past of ideological war, economic volatility, and spiritual exhaustion.
Ahead of us, according to U.S. artificial intelligence government experts, lies the convergence of human and machine intelligence, which futurists call the Technological Singularity.”
CONCLUSION
This means physicians can be charged for treatment decisions that deviate from bureaucratic standards or for billing errors, even if those deviations are medically sound or unintentional. This shift has profound implications:
- Criminalization of Medical Judgment: What was once considered a sound clinical decision can be reinterpreted as a criminal act if it doesn’t align with administrative checklists or billing codes.
- Erosion of Trust: The relationship between doctor and patient, once sacred and based on trust, is now often replaced with suspicion and surveillance.
- Increased Prosecutions: There has been a marked rise in criminal investigations against medical professionals, with many facing allegations that challenge their professional integrity, often without direct evidence of harm to patients.
- Focus on Metrics over Nuance: Government agencies often use data analytics and AI to identify “outliers” or “emerging fraud schemes,” treating statistical deviations as probable cause for criminal investigation, without considering the complex clinical context or patient needs.
- Stigma and Ruin: Even if charges are never filed or are later overturned, the mere presence of agents, seizure of records, and public exposure can ruin a physician’s career and reputation, as seen in cases like Dr. Pramela Ganji and Dr. Forrest Tennant. This environment contributes to medical burnout and discourages independent practices.
“First, they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.” —
Mahatma Gandhi
OR SEND
TO CASH APP:$docnorm
ZELLE 3135103378
ALL WATCHED OVER BY MACHINES OF LOVING GRACE
BE SURE TO DONATE TO THE MARK IBSEN GOFUNDME DEFENSE FUND, WHERE THE SON ALWAYS RISES!!!
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN
