Wednesday, December 3, 2014
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Monday, November 24, 2014
Sunday, November 23, 2014
Saturday, November 22, 2014
Monday, November 17, 2014
"Health reform does not change your Medicaid or Family Health Plus coverage or benefits." (excerpt )
First of all: What is the standard of care? What does that mean?
Obama and Pelosi metioned a "standard of care" that is met , legally, when the mandate is followed. What does a mandate, such as birth control on elderly policies have to do with treatment in office or care in a hospital during a stay, for; let's say surgery?
The answer is: Nothing. Mandates have nothing to do with the proceedures or post op proceedures or extended care for the patients.
- A standard of care cannot be defined as a mandate followed. And a mandate followed cannot be defined as a government standard of care. -
Criteria in real patient care cannot be defined as a mandate that is met with the approval of the state regulators.
Obama and Pelosi metioned a "standard of care" that is met , legally, when the mandate is followed. What does a mandate, such as birth control on elderly policies have to do with treatment in office or care in a hospital during a stay, for; let's say surgery?
The answer is: Nothing. Mandates have nothing to do with the proceedures or post op proceedures or extended care for the patients.
- A standard of care cannot be defined as a mandate followed. And a mandate followed cannot be defined as a government standard of care. -
Criteria in real patient care cannot be defined as a mandate that is met with the approval of the state regulators.
*(Excerprt from N.Y. State HealthcareWebsite)
The Effect on Health Insurance Programs: Medicaid, Family Health Plus, Child Health Plus, and Medicare
Does health reform change my family's Medicaid or Family Health Plus?
Health reform does not change your Medicaid or Family Health Plus coverage or benefits.
A. No changes were made to what is covered on Medicaid. The same coverage to the same people, in the same income bracket. But with more allowance to people who make more money.
Their coverage on Medicaid may or may not be as good as they had if they dropped a policy and replaced it with Medicaid.
B. Changes that were necessary were never considered. Such as testing for epelepsy, or certain brain diseases, seizures, ect.
The coverage I grew up with is still the same. Affordable Health Care did nothing to change the actual coverage on lower income Americans. (That Is True!)
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Obama Care Ended Equal Care In Hospitals- Ended Equal Coverage Under Criteria.
Hospitals can work out plans with insurance companies with respect to what they (the insurance companies) want to actually pay for, according to the policy language in legal terms.
Ok, now, mandates are not what is agreed upon with respect to those negotiations. You will experience differing levels of quality in your care, depending on the coverage you have and the new proceedures covering your care at the hospital.
The days of equal care ended with Obama Care. Obama Care Ended Equal Coverage Under Criteria.
Mandates Do Not Mean Standard Of Care- Your Rights -Medical -Obama (Don't) Care
Meeting required mandates does not mean mandates equal a standard of care. It doesn't mean a right to health care equal to the average policy holder.
Mandates do not create a standard of care; quality health care has nothing to do with mandates.
The legal definition of the care you had the right to receive from a care giver was found in guidelines of criteria. Each patient was guaranteed the right to the same basic care in the hospital or doctors office under a guideline of criteria. That system of provider ship is now non existent.
Obama care guaranteed that you don't have the same rights to health care. Mandates do not cover criteria. The standard of care is a meaningless term.
There is no legal definition to the care you receive, now. The only actual legal definition now, is the mandate set forth by the Affordable Health Care Act. Health care can mean anything. There is no determination of what is required by hospitals in the circumstance of care giving to the patient.
If a certain procedure is not specifically covered on your policy, the hospital is not legally bound to follow any previous protocol in care giving.
(Including any type of criteria in patient care.)
Mandates do not create a standard of care; quality health care has nothing to do with mandates.
The legal definition of the care you had the right to receive from a care giver was found in guidelines of criteria. Each patient was guaranteed the right to the same basic care in the hospital or doctors office under a guideline of criteria. That system of provider ship is now non existent.
Obama care guaranteed that you don't have the same rights to health care. Mandates do not cover criteria. The standard of care is a meaningless term.
There is no legal definition to the care you receive, now. The only actual legal definition now, is the mandate set forth by the Affordable Health Care Act. Health care can mean anything. There is no determination of what is required by hospitals in the circumstance of care giving to the patient.
If a certain procedure is not specifically covered on your policy, the hospital is not legally bound to follow any previous protocol in care giving.
(Including any type of criteria in patient care.)
"Grand Canyon" abstract Poster- donrobbins
"Grand Canyon" abstract- Poster
"Grand Canyon" abstract- Poster by AccountOpen matted prints
Friday, November 14, 2014
Obamacare deceptions. OBC. Manipulations, hidden taxes. False data.
https://plus.google.com/+ABCNews/posts/2LMXJk38yK5 Johnathan Gruber
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/14/despite-dem-claims-trash-talking-gruber-was-well-paid-adviser-for-obamacare-and/ Gruber- Admits that American voters were deceived. He calls Americans stupid. Ignorant about economics.
Nancy Pelosi denies knowing the architect of Obamacare. Her 2009 website highlights him as an expert advisor to the administration.
Obamacare deceptions. OBC. Manipulations, hidden taxes. False data.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/14/despite-dem-claims-trash-talking-gruber-was-well-paid-adviser-for-obamacare-and/ Gruber- Admits that American voters were deceived. He calls Americans stupid. Ignorant about economics.
Nancy Pelosi denies knowing the architect of Obamacare. Her 2009 website highlights him as an expert advisor to the administration.
Obamacare deceptions. OBC. Manipulations, hidden taxes. False data.
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
" Made up information doesn't count."
http://donrobbinsnewc.blogspot.com/2014/11/no-incident-for-ncaa-to-base-fines-on.html (My Other Blog)
No evidence yet to base charges on against officials. Where is the 2001 incident information?
Made up information doesn't count.
No evidence yet to base charges on against officials. Where is the 2001 incident information?
Made up information doesn't count.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Monday, November 10, 2014
What Satisfaction Do I Get? Penn State Work- Officials Innocent- (Truckers Hat)
Their
careers and the story lines, the sale, attention getting, tabloid justice
wrapped up in a gift package. All that, but no one cared about the neutral,
boring, not flashy, truth. No one dug for the facts. The facts. That's what
justice should be based on and fair and impartial trials. Justice should be
blind - not premeditated.
What satisfaction do I get out of this? They say I go on and on and on. Every day I have something to Tweet about or I say something on G+ that most people ignore. Sometimes I get as little as ten views for the whole day on my blog, but that's all I have. I'm not a big time reporter, I just knew Sandusky was innocent and the school officials did nothing wrong, that they were accused of. *How could they? If there was only one known incident and I was there at the school, in the locker room, when it happened? Sandusky wasn't. A child wasn't. It was 9:30 in the morning, not at night. It was in the Student Athletic Services building, not in the Lasch building.
What I get out of this work is the satisfaction that when our system doesn't work right, there are still people who believe in fair justice. And in this case it was a simple matter to prove the Penn State officials innocent and that Sandusky was not involved in the only incident in 2001.
Knowing that the information they must have had was false, or falsified. No one knew I was there. No one remembered the actual incident in 2001, but I did.
Calhoun saw the imposter in the shower room in 1998 with me and the security guard. He said nothing. Or, he was told not to say anything. But was he told to bring attention to Sandusky by saying he saw him in the Smeal building? I think so!
I did have some personal involvement in the case, even though I was unknown.
If Sandusky is acquitted, because someone finally decides to actually check the false evidence, then I'll be satisfied.
If the prosecutors drop the goofy, idiotic, charges against the officials, then I'll be satisfied.
If Paterno is given back his wins and the school and prosecutors apologize to his family for the gross injustice, then I'll be satisfied.
When will they seek the facts about the 2001 evidence, which was used to bring charges against the school? Where is the information that made them believe officials were guilty of a cover up? Where is the evidence they claimed to have had on Sandusky raping a child in a shower room in 2001? (There isn't any evidence. There isn't any information.)
Is it possible, that in 2002, McQueary did see a man in the shower room in the Lasch building that was a Sandusky look alike? Yes.
Was it possible that Calhoun saw a man in the shower room in the Morgan building that was a Sandusky imposter, posing as Sandusky, making a video tape? Yes.
I know it's possible, because I saw him myself at the same time the security guard and Calhoun did.
Did the security guard write a report on it? Was the report taken out of an office in the Morgan building? If so, was the security guard not working at Penn State anymore when the report was taken; when the office was broken into, after hours?
Is the report missing? Is the security guard missing? Did Ray Gricar suspect foul play? Is that why he came up missing?
Why was the matter of the man who looked like Jerry Sandusky making a video tape, in the shower room, pretending to molest a child never mentioned?
A video tape of a man that looked like, but wasn't Jerry Sandusky, pretending to molest a child. The little man in the tape looked like a child of about twelve, but was still just a man, not a child. Not a child. A man. A little man who I thought was a child when I first walked into the shower room.
In the shower room, with the man who looked like Sandusky and the little man, was another man holding the video camera. And a man named George Steinbrenner.
Was the incident covered up? Is that the real reason Calhoun thought he might lose his job, if he said something about Steinbrenner?
If there was a complaint about a person someone thought was Sandusky but was actually the impostor, did Gricar clear Sandusky but not know about the look alike?
Did the look alike do things that people believed was Sandusky?
It seems so.
The kid in the high school locker room. For one.
What satisfaction do I get out of this? They say I go on and on and on. Every day I have something to Tweet about or I say something on G+ that most people ignore. Sometimes I get as little as ten views for the whole day on my blog, but that's all I have. I'm not a big time reporter, I just knew Sandusky was innocent and the school officials did nothing wrong, that they were accused of. *How could they? If there was only one known incident and I was there at the school, in the locker room, when it happened? Sandusky wasn't. A child wasn't. It was 9:30 in the morning, not at night. It was in the Student Athletic Services building, not in the Lasch building.
What I get out of this work is the satisfaction that when our system doesn't work right, there are still people who believe in fair justice. And in this case it was a simple matter to prove the Penn State officials innocent and that Sandusky was not involved in the only incident in 2001.
Knowing that the information they must have had was false, or falsified. No one knew I was there. No one remembered the actual incident in 2001, but I did.
Calhoun saw the imposter in the shower room in 1998 with me and the security guard. He said nothing. Or, he was told not to say anything. But was he told to bring attention to Sandusky by saying he saw him in the Smeal building? I think so!
I did have some personal involvement in the case, even though I was unknown.
If Sandusky is acquitted, because someone finally decides to actually check the false evidence, then I'll be satisfied.
If the prosecutors drop the goofy, idiotic, charges against the officials, then I'll be satisfied.
If Paterno is given back his wins and the school and prosecutors apologize to his family for the gross injustice, then I'll be satisfied.
When will they seek the facts about the 2001 evidence, which was used to bring charges against the school? Where is the information that made them believe officials were guilty of a cover up? Where is the evidence they claimed to have had on Sandusky raping a child in a shower room in 2001? (There isn't any evidence. There isn't any information.)
Is it possible, that in 2002, McQueary did see a man in the shower room in the Lasch building that was a Sandusky look alike? Yes.
Was it possible that Calhoun saw a man in the shower room in the Morgan building that was a Sandusky imposter, posing as Sandusky, making a video tape? Yes.
I know it's possible, because I saw him myself at the same time the security guard and Calhoun did.
Did the security guard write a report on it? Was the report taken out of an office in the Morgan building? If so, was the security guard not working at Penn State anymore when the report was taken; when the office was broken into, after hours?
Is the report missing? Is the security guard missing? Did Ray Gricar suspect foul play? Is that why he came up missing?
Why was the matter of the man who looked like Jerry Sandusky making a video tape, in the shower room, pretending to molest a child never mentioned?
A video tape of a man that looked like, but wasn't Jerry Sandusky, pretending to molest a child. The little man in the tape looked like a child of about twelve, but was still just a man, not a child. Not a child. A man. A little man who I thought was a child when I first walked into the shower room.
In the shower room, with the man who looked like Sandusky and the little man, was another man holding the video camera. And a man named George Steinbrenner.
Was the incident covered up? Is that the real reason Calhoun thought he might lose his job, if he said something about Steinbrenner?
If there was a complaint about a person someone thought was Sandusky but was actually the impostor, did Gricar clear Sandusky but not know about the look alike?
Did the look alike do things that people believed was Sandusky?
It seems so.
The kid in the high school locker room. For one.
Make your own personalized
hats online at Zazzle.
Sunday, November 9, 2014
Cube City "Cubed" Wallet cases 5/5 S4 6 by Don Robbins scenery
"Cube City Night Scenery iPhone Wallet Case by AccountOpen
Look at other City Wallet Cases at zazzle.com
Saturday, November 8, 2014
Wallet and iPhone case in one .-Abstract by DonRobbins
Great price on these Wallet cases! Slick and does two jobs. Wallet and iPhone case in one . Under 25 dollars. Look for sale price.
Wallet Cases -Tree Fall Leaves Scenery-
iPhone 6 Wallet Case
Wallet Cases -Tree Fall Leaves Scenery-
iPhone 6 Wallet Case
 |
| Samsung Galaxy S4 case Wallet Case |
 |
| iPhone 5 Wallet Case. |
Thursday, November 6, 2014
Get style you like on customize! iPhone 6 cases by Don Robbins "Tree" Abstract scenery
Tree Scenery Abstract iPhone 6 Case by AccountOpen
See more Tree Casemate Cases at zazzle.com
Change the background colors on customize to get style you like!
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Make A T Shirt- "Impeach Obama Now!" No Minimum (Stickers)
Impeach Now! T Shirt
Impeach Now! T Shirt by AccountOpen
Tuesday, November 4, 2014
Sunday, November 2, 2014
.JPG)
Saturday, November 1, 2014
Point By Point- Dates- Incidents- Sandusky Not Guilty- Probably Framed- Corruption Possible In Prosecution
Alamo bowl- Nothing
1998- Calhoun (Smeal building siting) Nothing
1998 Shower Room (Student Athlete Services building) Not Sandusky- *Sandusky look alike with little man and George Steinbrenner and chauffer making a video mocking a sexual assault.
Sandusky was not present. Calhoun apparently told it was Sandusky.
Office broken into later that week where report probably was filed. (In the Student Athletic Services building)
Security guard- myself and Calhoun witnessed the video taping in the shower room.
*Ray Gricar- It was my theory that the security guard came up missing and Gricar traced the disappearance back to the shower room incident in 1998. And then Gricar came up missing.
2000- Lasch building shower room siting by Petrosky and Calhoun. Same man that Calhoun saw in the shower room in 1998. (Not Sandusky.)
2001- Shower room incident in the Student Athletic Services building. No person present in the shower room. Sounds only. Most likely sounds from fake tape made in 1998. Some of the same people saw me and played the sound effects when I entered the locker room with the people touring the campus.
Log entry about the incident in Paterno's notebook. Handwritten.
Other information about the incident was typed on a paper in the office in the Student Athletic Services building office down the hall from the locker room. That paper was apparently filed in his office, by Schultz, and then forgotten about.
2001- No other incident concerning a shower room on campus.
Nothing was reported in 2001 about Jerry Sandusky. The incident that McQueary reported was actually in 2002. The Prosecutors were wrong. Whatever evidence they had about the 2001 incident was in the Student Athletic Services building at 9:00 in the morning. That evidence has not been made public. There may have also been a video tape that people thought Sandusky was in , but wasn't.
2002- Nothing. Mcqueary saw a man who looked like Sandusky with the little man. Little man had light brown wavy hair, gray blue eyes, was about 4'7 feet tall. Weight about 100 pounds.
It looks like there was an attempted frame up on Jerry Sandusky- possibly an extortion attempt that went wrong. The security guard may have came up missing after the report was filed. And then Gricar came up missing when he put the pieces of the puzzle together.
Did the security guard come up missing? Was Gricar investigating the disaperance of the security guard?
Did the look alike convince people he was Sandusky? Did he fondle children to make people believe it was Sandusky? We know he was making a video tape in the shower room in 1998. If people saw the tape they may have assumed it was Sandusky and then thought he was guilty. Is that the reason they became so motivated and sure he was guilty?
I believe that is what happened. I believe that Sandusky is innocent.
DID GRICAR SEE THE TAPE? DID BALDWIN? DID FREEH SEE THE TAPE? DID KELLY?
? WHERE IS THE TAPE ?
1998- Calhoun (Smeal building siting) Nothing
1998 Shower Room (Student Athlete Services building) Not Sandusky- *Sandusky look alike with little man and George Steinbrenner and chauffer making a video mocking a sexual assault.
Sandusky was not present. Calhoun apparently told it was Sandusky.
Office broken into later that week where report probably was filed. (In the Student Athletic Services building)
Security guard- myself and Calhoun witnessed the video taping in the shower room.
*Ray Gricar- It was my theory that the security guard came up missing and Gricar traced the disappearance back to the shower room incident in 1998. And then Gricar came up missing.
2000- Lasch building shower room siting by Petrosky and Calhoun. Same man that Calhoun saw in the shower room in 1998. (Not Sandusky.)
2001- Shower room incident in the Student Athletic Services building. No person present in the shower room. Sounds only. Most likely sounds from fake tape made in 1998. Some of the same people saw me and played the sound effects when I entered the locker room with the people touring the campus.
Log entry about the incident in Paterno's notebook. Handwritten.
Other information about the incident was typed on a paper in the office in the Student Athletic Services building office down the hall from the locker room. That paper was apparently filed in his office, by Schultz, and then forgotten about.
2001- No other incident concerning a shower room on campus.
Nothing was reported in 2001 about Jerry Sandusky. The incident that McQueary reported was actually in 2002. The Prosecutors were wrong. Whatever evidence they had about the 2001 incident was in the Student Athletic Services building at 9:00 in the morning. That evidence has not been made public. There may have also been a video tape that people thought Sandusky was in , but wasn't.
2002- Nothing. Mcqueary saw a man who looked like Sandusky with the little man. Little man had light brown wavy hair, gray blue eyes, was about 4'7 feet tall. Weight about 100 pounds.
It looks like there was an attempted frame up on Jerry Sandusky- possibly an extortion attempt that went wrong. The security guard may have came up missing after the report was filed. And then Gricar came up missing when he put the pieces of the puzzle together.
Did the security guard come up missing? Was Gricar investigating the disaperance of the security guard?
Did the look alike convince people he was Sandusky? Did he fondle children to make people believe it was Sandusky? We know he was making a video tape in the shower room in 1998. If people saw the tape they may have assumed it was Sandusky and then thought he was guilty. Is that the reason they became so motivated and sure he was guilty?
I believe that is what happened. I believe that Sandusky is innocent.
DID GRICAR SEE THE TAPE? DID BALDWIN? DID FREEH SEE THE TAPE? DID KELLY?
? WHERE IS THE TAPE ?
Friday, October 31, 2014
2001 Evidence- Incident Made Up By Attorney Generals Office- Sandusky Innocent.
There was evidence about an incident in 2001 but it wasn't about Sandusky. And, it wasn't in the Lasch Football Building.
The prosecution knew it.
The incident was a real incident. (I was a witness.)
It was used to try and convict Penn State.
Jerry Sandusky was just the fall guy.
There was no incident between Sandusky and McQueary in 2001.
McQueary couldn't have reported the incident about Sandusky in 2001 because it didn't have anything to do with Sandusky.
The truth about the 2001 incident has never been told, yet.
No one remembered it. But I did, because I was there.
The prosecution knew it.
The incident was a real incident. (I was a witness.)
It was used to try and convict Penn State.
Jerry Sandusky was just the fall guy.
There was no incident between Sandusky and McQueary in 2001.
McQueary couldn't have reported the incident about Sandusky in 2001 because it didn't have anything to do with Sandusky.
The truth about the 2001 incident has never been told, yet.
No one remembered it. But I did, because I was there.
EXCERPT: http://donrobbinsblog.com/2013/05/24/penn-state-info-related-royers/
The investigators claimed that the incident was about Sandusky, but it wasn't. They mentioned the incident and the date-2001- in trail, when the prosecution claimed that McQueary told them he heard the sounds of someone being raped before he went into the shower room and saw Sandusky. McQueary said that he never told them he heard anything like that. Charges were never proven against Sandusky concerning the incident in 2001. Sandusky was never convicted of those charges. The witness that claimed Sandusky raped him in the shower room in 2001 was not charged with giving false testimony. Even though he lied and the court knew it. Other claims against Sandusky were made by individuals and most of the claims were completely absurd. He was convicted on hearsay, even after the false testimony. And even after the matter from 2001 was dropped.
It was possible to find out that the incident from 2001 had nothing to do with Sandusky but the judge let the falsified evidence into the initial investigation.
EXCERPT: http://donrobbinsblog.com/
THE POINT.
THE MATTER WAS THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO KNOW
WHERE THE INFORMATION CAME FROM AND
UNDERSTAND THAT IT DID NOT APPLY TO SANDUSKY.
THE MATTER WAS THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO KNOW
WHERE THE INFORMATION CAME FROM AND
UNDERSTAND THAT IT DID NOT APPLY TO SANDUSKY.
THE 2001 INFORMATION WAS FALSIFIED.
The question is: Whether or not Kelly knew the 2001
information was falsified before she pressed charges against
Sandusky, and accused Penn State of the cover up?
Not Jerry. Sandusky Is Innocent. "not Jerry".
http://donrobbinsnewcmagazine.blogspot.com/
"not Jerry" in the shower room. Not Jerry Sandusky on the video. Not Sandusky in the high school locker room. Not Jerry. "not Jerry". Sandusky is innocent and they knew it!
"not Jerry" in the shower room. Not Jerry Sandusky on the video. Not Sandusky in the high school locker room. Not Jerry. "not Jerry". Sandusky is innocent and they knew it!
"not Jerry" Mesh Hats | Zazzle
Magic Flying Pig (ACTION RIDER!!!) Ghost- Zombies- Poster- Day Before -Pictures Artworks by Don Robbins
Just before the sun sets. On Halloween.
Some pictures for you. Have a GREAT time tonight!
Hapy Halloween!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)