Affiliate Marketing Blog |

I know this question has been asked MANY times before, however not to my specifications…
I want to become a Federal Prosecutor/ Maybe defense attorney, specializing in Economic crimes ..ie. Tax evasion, SEC violations, consumer, mortgage, real estate, tax, and other types of financial fraud and unforeseen white collar crimes.
I tried researching notable U.S. Attorneys that have the job I would like to have one day and could find very little information on their backgrounds (other than what law school and year they graduated from). Did these people receive "on the job training"???
As for the small amount I was able to find information on, I found that 1 out of 3 majored in Accounting, ex CPA’s, Forensic Accountants (Which requires a CPA license in NY state). (I’m assuming special prosecutions dealing with white collar crimes didn’t exist as much 20 years ago as they do today)
However, being the next generation, I would like to exemplify my qualifications for a future position and I ASK… Is it worth majoring in Accounting, -pursuing a Forensic Accountant title before going into law school and perhaps leaving my resources open in case I later decide to advance in a graduate MS/MBA program in Accounting or another field?
Should I just worry about getting into law school and get over with my undergrad majoring in "good ‘ol fashioned basket weaving" Economics, Criminology, Business Administration …maybe Minor in accounting, thus giving me the chance to breeze through undergrad with outstanding achievement (One has to admit, Accounting can be a tough cookie and def. calls for some serious study)

As of right now I am in a dilemma but considering to finish my last 2 years of undergrad in accounting due to its flexibility in the business industry. However I am up against a tough competition but still able to get into a reputable business school in NY should I choose to continue. Then again I can still major in accounting, and not waste time and money in going to a "reputable" business school, as a local college will qualify me just as well and giving me a chance to put more emphasis on the law school I choose to go to.

Please respond if you are in a related field, or associated with anyone in the field who may exemplify what I have described.

(School counselors, Attorneys, Judges, Accountants, Forensic Accountants, Statisticians, Economist, Government Officials, Law Enforcement Affiliates etc..)

Thank you for your responses.

I am a retired attorney. I went from a small state university to a
top-ten law school. I have at different times been a prosecutor and a defense attorney.

U.S. Attorneys are usually political appointees. The position which would fit your plans is an attorney in a U.S. Attorney’s office. You will probably need to be in the top ten per cent of your law school class and to be a member of your law school’s most competitive law review to be hired for such a job. You would also need to have graduated from a top-fifteen law school, or the best law school in the state where you will work, or the same law school as the U.S. Attorney who hires you.

So, it’s a very hard road.

The white collar crimes or consumer protection division of a state attorney general’s office would also be an appropriate place for you to start your career. The preparation is the same as I have listed above.

It is difficult to build a practice on the defense side of this area of law unless you have previously been a prosecutor.

I spent a good portion of my career prosecuting economic crimes, but they were not at all financially complex.

Please feel free to email me if you have further questions.

Just a few weeks ago, on September 4th, FEMA handed over $1 million to the ACORN Institute, an ACORN affiliate in New Orleans. The grant is for “fire prevention.” You can find the grant here http://www.firegrantsupport.com/fps/award/08/ . Virtually every other organization receiving “fire prevention” grants is a fire deparment or medical facility.

Here’s some background on ACORN Institute:

An affiliate of ACORN, the ACORN Institute, has been a participant in the IRS tax assistance program. The institute prides itself as a one-stop shopping service for low-income households seeking free benefits. In addition to tax preparation, it also provides information on how to secure government aid and to prevent mortgage foreclosure. Among the ACORN Institute’s partners are Citigroup, H&R Block and the Marguerite Casey Foundation. If even many Democrats in Congress are embarrassed by their history of support for ACORN, surely these entities can be as well.

Unclear what any of that has to do with “fire prevention.” According to FEMA, anyone with questions about the grants is urged to contact them at 1-866-274-0960, or via email at firegrants@dhs.gov.

I called the number to FEMA and they had no idea of who was investigating this or anything about it. Thanks for the tip.

Next. Calling H&R Block and Citigroup.

I have a FICO score above 800. 1st time home buyer. Putting down 20% for down payment. HSBC bank mentioned I would be a perfect candidate for a program that CRA offers….MGIC. The mortgage consultant of HSBC offered me a lower rate than CHASE & Wells Fargo with 0 points. What is the catch, if any?

I read up on MGIC site. Not sure if I’m understanding it correctly but it seems like if I ever decide to sell the house, the buyer’s bank must also be affiliated to CRA/MGIC or better say, the buyer must also be a candidate for this program which is to be a low income family. Is this correct? Any other things that I should be weary about with this program?

Weary or wary….if you have a score of 800 and 20% down payment you should stay away from anything associated with the CRA program. It appears your home may be in a blighted area if they are even bringing this up….but why limit the eventual buyer of your home to a limited pool? This does not make any sense to me especially since these buyers are extremely difficult to finance and usually manage to come up with a deal breaker such as a defaulted motorcycle loan a week before closing.

Check competitive rates at bankrate.com.

Dude. You don’t expect people to read all of that copy and pasting do you?
Edit it down and try again, in plain English.
Good luck.

NYT in 1999 wrote,
Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”

So for all you out there blaming capitalism for all of our problems… Part of the root cause just so happened to be a socialist policy.

Now everyone affiliated with both parties shouldn’t be off the hook for not warning the people about this. However, why are you all blaming one guy for policies started years before his presidency?
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

It’s funny how Clinton’s policies are still affecting us today. Clinton’s ineptness was the cause of the WTC bombings. Clinton’s ineptness was why we had to invade Iraq and Clinton’s ineptness is why we have this bailout crisis today. I remember an economist back in 1999 saying that he felt sorry for the guy coming in after Clinton.

I received an email from B2B CREDIT SOURCE selling shelf corporations to get a line of credit. I called the number to get more info. The shelf corporation is registered in the state of Nevada. The purchase price is $15,000 and 5% OF THE AMOUNT APPOVED FOR THE LINE OF CREDIT. It will take 60days to obtain the line of credit from $150,000 to 200,000 with NO PERSONAL GUARANTEE. Dave the agent at b2b credit source said mostly the 60days is for them to build the Dun and Brad score. Is there anyone out their, that has ever bought a shelf corporation for this purpose?

THIS IS THE EMAIL I RECEIVED.

Are you a Mortgage or Real Estate professional looking for investment money?

Get $200K in corporate financing to advance your company to the next level!

Get financing with no personal credit check or guarantee!

CLICK HERE For More Information By E-mail

At B2B Credit Source we have access to a private lender that will lend up to $200k

completely UNSECURED to ANY BUSINESS OWNER or INDIVIDUAL WISHING TO

START A BUSINESS!

* FINANCING IS APPROVED BASED ON CORPORATION’S CREDIT SCORE

* COMPLETELY UNSECURED

* NO PERSONAL GUARANTEE REQUIRED

* NO CREDIT CHECK!

* FUNDS AS SOON AS 30 DAYS

* RATES START AT 7%

Utilizing our unique and exclusive private money corporate credit program, ANYONE

CAN PARTICIPATE. Regardless of your credit!

* Become a referral affiliate and start earning commissions for referring your clients!

Call today!!!

B2B CREDIT SOURCE

800-906-7706

That’s a total scam. I would not go for it

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Videos Jeopardize ACORN’s Funding

S.A. Miller

The liberal activist group ACORN rakes in millions of dollars in federal taxpayer dollars a year - at least $53 million since 1994 for its housing programs alone - but that largess is in jeopardy after a hidden-camera video showed one of its workers advising a supposed prostitute how to cheat on taxes and mortgage applications.

House Republicans on Tuesday introduced the Defund ACORN Act that would sever all ties between the government and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), a day after the Senate voted overwhelmingly to prohibit funding the group in the 2010 housing appropriations bill.

House Republican leaders also sent a letter Tuesday to the Internal Revenue Service asking the agency to end its partnership with ACORN for providing free tax preparation services to low- and middle-income Americans.

"It is alarming to think that one the IRS’ largest and rapidly growing partners in a tax-preparation program allegedly employs individuals who encourage tax fraud," said the letter signed by House Minority Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio, Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia and Rep. David Camp of Michigan, ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee.

ACORN apparently is not compensated for its work with the IRS.

Despite most Senate Democrats turning on ACORN in the vote Monday, House Democratic leaders have remained mum about the troubles confronting their longtime ally and likely will resist bringing the Defund ACORN Act to the floor.

The vote would put many Democrats in a perilous position.

Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand, New York Democrat, who is considered vulnerable in the 2010 elections, found that out when she voted against the bill Monday. The National Republican Senatorial Committee quickly criticized her for breaking with her fellow New Yorker, Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a member of the Democratic leadership team, who supported the measure.

It is difficult to determine exactly how much federal funding ACORN collects because the organization and its more than 300 affiliated groups, which often use the same accounting firm and the same address in New Orleans, can vie for myriad federal grants.

For instance, ACORN and its affiliates are eligible for millions of dollars in economic stimulus funds.

"It’s not very transparent. That’s the problem," said Cleta Mitchell, national co-chairman of the Republican National Lawyers Association, which has called for a Justice Department investigation of ACORN and its funding.

The ACORN Housing Corp. last year took in about $27.8 million from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. That same year, ACORN Institute got more than $486,000 from the same agency, according to data compiled by Mr. Boehner’s office.

The data showed ACORN got more than $53.6 million from HUD since 1994. That does not include money from other agencies or money to affiliated groups, such as Citizen Services Inc., which beyond taxpayer money took in more than $800,000 performing get-out-the-vote work for President Obama’s 2008 campaign for the White House.

ACORN has long been a target for conservatives who say it skirts tax laws and commits other crimes while helping to elect Democratic candidates and promote liberal causes. Until now, those criticism failed to hobble ACORN with its close ties to Mr. Obama and decades of support from Democrats.

The videos that surfaced last week, however, proved a turning point.

The Obama administration canceled plans for ACORN to help with the 2010 census and the Senate voted 83-7 to refuse the group housing grants in upcoming appropriation bills for fiscal 2010.

ACORN officials did not return several calls inquiring what effect losing federal funding would have on the organization.

The group touts itself as the nation’s largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families, campaigning since 1970 on issues such as homeownership, living wages and better public schools.

Still, it came under fire during the presidential campaign after investigations of voter fraud in several battleground states, including Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Mexico and Nevada.

The group and its affiliates are currently the target of at least 14 lawsuits related to voter fraud in the 2008 election and a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act complaint filed by former ACORN members.

ACORN leaders have consistently denied any wrongdoing.

Last week, authorities in Florida’s Miami-Dade County accused 11 ACORN workers of falsifying hundreds of voter-registration cards prior to the 2008 presidential election, though ACORN officials took credit for alerting authorities to the potential illegal activity by its hired canvassers.

The video that put ACORN’s federal funding at risk was shot by conservative activist James O’Keefe, who appeared

Typical government funded organization: Full of graft and corruption:
.
Now just think about what is going to happen to health care it becomes another typical government organization.

Saturday, September 1, 2007

The Sunday Times of London is reporting that the Pentagon has plans for three days of massive air strikes against 1,200 targets in Iran. Last week, Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, told a meeting of The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal, that the military did not intend to carry out "pinprick strikes" against Iranian nuclear facilities. He said, "They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military."

Bush has already set the wheels in motion. With Rovian timing, Alberto Gonzales’ resignation was sandwiched between two Bush screeds - one aimed at ensuring Congress scares up $50 billion more for the occupation of Iraq, the other designed to scare us into supporting war on Iran. As Gonzales rides off into the sunset, the significant questions are who will take his place and how that choice will facilitate Bush’s occupation of Iraq and attack on Iran.

One name that’s been floated for Bush’s third attorney general is Joe Lieberman, the "independent" senator from Connecticut. Lieberman, who advocates the use of military force against Iran, was the only person Bush quoted in his August 28 speech to the American Legion. Bush called Iran "the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism" and pledged to "confront Tehran’s murderous activities."

Gonzales greased the Bush/Cheney wheels for torturing in violation of the Geneva Conventions, illegally spying on Americans, and purging disloyal Bushies.

Similarly, Lieberman would ensure the Justice Department mounts a vigorous defense of a war of aggression against Iran. And Bush would get a two-fer: Connecticut’s Republican governor would appoint a Republican to fill Lieberman’s seat, returning control of the Senate to the GOP. A Republican-controlled Senate would direct the agenda, thereby furthering the Bush/Cheney plan.

Lieberman is closely affiliated with American Israeli Public Affairs Committee. "AIPAC leverages its power by an alliance with the Christian Right, which has adopted a bizarre ideology of ‘Christian Zionism,’" according to University of Michigan professor Juan Cole. "It holds that the sooner the Palestinians are ethnically cleansed, the sooner Christ will come back. Without millions of these Christian Zionist allies," Cole added, "AIPAC would be much less influential and effective."

During the 2004 election, a 100% "AIPAC voting record" was Lieberman’s litmus test for an acceptable presidential candidate. As the House of Representatives was on the verge of passing a resolution that would’ve required Bush to consult Congress before attacking Iran, the AIPAC lobby stopped it in its tracks.

Bush’s WMD-hyping against Iran is déja vu in the run-up to Operation Iraqi Disaster, where he played loose and fast with the truth about Iraq’s alleged WMDs. His statement that a nuclear Iran could put the region "under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust" conjures up his images of a "mushroom cloud" in the hype-up to Iraq.

How inconvenient for Bush that the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) just found Iran’s uranium enrichment program is operating well below capacity and is nowhere near producing significant amounts of nuclear fuel. The IAEA report says that Iran "has been providing the agency with access to declared nuclear materials, and has provided the required nuclear material accountancy reports in connection with declared nuclear material and facilities."

Iran and IAEA agreed on a plan with a step-by-step timetable of cooperation to settle unresolved issues. The agreement said there were "no other remaining issues and ambiguities regarding Iran’s past nuclear program and activities," and characterized the accord as "a significant step forward."

"This is the first time Iran is ready to discuss all the outstanding issues which triggered the crisis in confidence," said IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei. "I’m clear at this stage you need to give Iran a chance to prove its stated goodwill. Sanctions alone, I know for sure, are not going to lead to a durable solution"

In 2003, when Dr. ElBaradei reported there was no evidence that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program, the White House was not pleased. And as Saddam Hussein became more cooperative with the weapons inspector, Bush became "infuriated," according to Bob Woodward.

Bush’s vow, "We will confront this danger before it is too late," is the Iran incarnation of his illegal preemptive war doctrine, which he inaugurated in Iraq. In a clear signal he is seeking regime change in Iran, Bush called for "an Iran whose government is accountable to its people, instead of leaders who promote terror and pursue the technology that could be used to develop nuclear weapons."

Barnett Rubin reported on Global Affairs blog that one of the leading neo-conservative institutions has "instructions" from Dick Cheney’s office to "roll out a campaign for war with Iran in the week after Labor Day; it will be coordinated with the American Enterprise Institute, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, Fox, and the usual suspects. It will be heavy sustained assault on the airwaves, designed to knock public sentiment into a position from which a war can be maintained. Evidently they don’t think they’ll ever get majority support for this - they want something like 35-40 percent support, which in their book is ‘plenty.’"

Bush/Cheney created the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) to lead a propaganda campaign to bolster public support for war with Iraq. The White House decided to wait until after Labor Day of 2002 to kick off WHIG’s mission. Chief of staff Andrew Card explained, "From a marketing point of view, you don’t introduce new products in August." Five years later, they’re marketing a new and even more dangerous product - war with Iran. British military historian Corelli Barnett says "an attack on Iran would effectively launch World War III."

Our military spending has reached $1 billion every 2-1/2 days and we are borrowing $2-1/2 billion per day. Bush is mortgaging our children’s future security and wealth. We have lost more than 3700 soldiers in Iraq and tens of thousands of Iraqis have died.

We have already seen how easily Congress caves in to AIPAC. It’s up to the people. As Noam Chomsky said, "The most effective barrier to a White House decision to launch a war [on Iran] is the kind of organized popular opposition that frightened the political-military leadership enough in 1968 that they were reluctant to send more troops to Vietnam."
Thank you Ashley!

you are truly beautiful. i loved every word you said.

and it is highly likely we will attack iran before bush leaves office. although they haven’t preemptively attacked another country in over 200 years. how long has it been for america, the great.

I have a FICO score above 800. 1st time home buyer. Putting down 20% for down payment. HSBC bank mentioned I would be a perfect candidate for a program that CRA offers….MGIC. The mortgage consultant of HSBC offered me a lower rate than CHASE & Wells Fargo with 0 points. What is the catch, if any?

I read up on MGIC site. Not sure if I’m understanding it correctly but it seems like if I ever decide to sell the house, the buyer’s bank must also be affiliated to CRA/MGIC or better say, the buyer must also be a candidate for this program which is to be a low income family. Is this correct? Any other things that I should be weary about with this program?

Sorry - but this seems a bit fishy - if you are putting 20% down, then you shouldn’t need mortgage insurance. You need to get a better explanation of what you are getting from MGIC and HSBC before putting any money into this program.

When I saw the report on the breakdown of funding for the stimulus package, it seemed to me that the concept is upside-down! The top-two money-getters are health care and education at $250B-$300B, while on the bottom are the tax incentives to home owners and energy programs, weighing in at $75B-$100B. It is hard to dispute that the mortgage crisis and soaring energy costs were at least two of the catalysts of our current economic situation, and yet these two areas are receiving the least attention of all programs on the agenda. Why are these not at the top?

Further, I don’t understand how spending so much on health care and education are going to create the millions of jobs we seek. The DOL calculates the total unemployment for these two industries at just 792K jobs out of the total 13 million who are unemployed in Jan 2009. The simple math tells me that 6% of the unemployed work force are primed to receive 35% of the package! Sure, health care for the unemployed will improve their lifestyle, but I don’t see how it will get the unemployed back into the work force. Likewise, I don’t see how education will help the current need of putting workers back into the work force… unless it is to push the unemployed ranks of the blue-collar worker into the unemployed ranks of the white-collar worker.

I’d like to see more money spent on the heart of the problem: Americans concern with the housing market instability, the stress we all feel about losing our homes to lenders whose financial stability is in jeopardy, and our fear over the volatile energy industry and our dependence on foreign oil.

References:
http://media.idahostatesman.com/smedia/2009/02/08/17/STIMULUS_BILLS.sff.standalone.prod_affiliate.36.jpg
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t11.htm
Phillopian: I sent basically this same text as an email to both of my Senators and my Representative as well. One senator responded that he did not vote for the stimulus and expressed similar concerns as mine. I’m curious to know the other side of the story, though… what is the thought process that Congress went through to identify the areas/amounts that currently add up to $800B in tax-paying dollars (plus interest, of course!)

Sadly, fixing the problem isn’t the main goal of this bill. The Democrats were planning to go this direction (towards a France-like socialism) before this economic crisis hit. Never mind that Democrat Barney Frank (among others) dismissed concerns about sub-prime mortgages. Never mind that he called the representative from the Congressional Budget Office "incompetant" and possibly "rascist" for bringing up the matter of Fannie and Freddie back in 2004! No, Barney gets a pass, because "he loves me, I love you."

They do not want to "fix" the problem, they want to return to the New Deal, in which government has greater control over our lives.