SENATE WRITTEN TESTIMONY Form

NOOOOOOO. You are talking to a military romance scammer. I received an email from the US Army that directly answers your question that is pasted below please keep reading.I believe you are the victim of a military Romance Scam whereas the person you are talking to is a foreign national posing as an American Soldier claiming to be stationed overseas on a peacekeeping mission. That's the key to the scam they always claim to be on a peacekeeping mission.Part of their scam is saying that they have no access to their money that their mission is highly dangerous.If your boyfriend girlfriend/future husband/wife is asking you to do the following or has exhibited this behavior, it is a most likely a scam:Moves to private messaging site immediately after meeting you on Facebook or SnapChat or Instagram or some dating or social media site. Often times they delete the site you met them on right after they asked you to move to a more private messaging siteProfesses love to you very quickly & seems to quote poems and song lyrics along with using their own sort of broken language, as they profess their love and devotion quickly. They also showed concern for your health and love for your family.Promises marriage as soon as he/she gets to state for leave that they asked you to pay for.They Requests money (wire transfers) and Amazon, iTune ,Verizon, etc gift cards, for medicine, religious practices, and leaves to come home, internet access, complete job assignments, help sick friend, get him out of trouble, or anything that sounds fishy.The military does provide all the soldier needs including food medical Care and transportation for leave. Trust me, I lived it, you are probably being scammed. I am just trying to show you examples that you are most likely being connned.Below is an email response I received after I sent an inquiry to the US government when I discovered I was scammed. I received this wonderful response back with lots of useful links on how to find and report your scammer. And how to learn more about Romance Scams.Right now you can also copy the picture he gave you and do a google image search and you will hopefully see the pictures of the real person he is impersonating. this doesn't always work and take some digging. if you find the real person you can direct message them and alert them that their image is being used for scamming.Good Luck to you and I'm sorry this may be happening to you. please continue reading the government response I received below it's very informative.   You have contacted an email that is monitored by the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command. Unfortunately, this is a common concern. We assure you there is never any reason to send money to anyone claiming to be a Soldier online. If you have only spoken with this person online, it is likely they are not a U.S. Soldier at all. If this is a suspected imposter social media profile, we urge you to report it to that platform as soon as possible. Please continue reading for more resources and answers to other frequently asked questions:  How to report an imposter Facebook profile: Caution-https://www.facebook.com/help/16... < Caution-https://www.facebook.com/help/16... >   Answers to frequently asked questions:  - Soldiers and their loved ones are not charged money so that the Soldier can go on leave.  - Soldiers are not charged money for secure communications or leave.  - Soldiers do not need permission to get married.  - Soldiers emails are in this format: john.doe.mil@mail.mil < Caution-mailto: john.doe.mil@mail.mil > anything ending in .us or .com is not an official email account.  - Soldiers have medical insurance, which pays for their medical costs when treated at civilian health care facilities worldwide – family and friends do not need to pay their medical expenses.  - Military aircraft are not used to transport Privately Owned Vehicles.  - Army financial offices are not used to help Soldiers buy or sell items of any kind.  - Soldiers deployed to Combat Zones do not need to solicit money from the public to feed or house themselves or their troops.  - Deployed Soldiers do not find large unclaimed sums of money and need your help to get that money out of the country.  Anyone who tells you one of the above-listed conditions/circumstances is true is likely posing as a Soldier and trying to steal money from you.  We would urge you to immediately cease all contact with this individual.  For more information on avoiding online scams and to report this crime, please see the following sites and articles:   This article may help clarify some of the tricks social media scammers try to use to take advantage of people: Caution-https://www.army.mil/article/61432/< Caution-https://www.army.mil/article/61432/>   CID advises vigilance against 'romance scams,' scammers impersonating Soldiers  Caution-https://www.army.mil/article/180749 < Caution-https://www.army.mil/article/180749 >   FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center: Caution-http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx< Caution-http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx>   U.S. Army investigators warn public against romance scams: Caution-https://www.army.mil/article/130...< Caution-https://www.army.mil/article/130...>   DOD warns troops, families to be cybercrime smart -Caution-http://www.army.mil/article/1450...< Caution-http://www.army.mil/article/1450...>   Use caution with social networking  Caution-https://www.army.mil/article/146...< Caution-https://www.army.mil/article/146...>    Please see our frequently asked questions section under scams and legal issues. Caution-http://www.army.mil/faq/ < Caution-http://www.army.mil/faq/ > or visit Caution-http://www.cid.army.mil/ < Caution-http://www.cid.army.mil/ >.  The challenge with most scams is determining if an individual is a legitimate member of the US Army. Based on the Privacy Act of 1974, we cannot provide this information. If concerned about a scam you may contact the Better Business Bureau (if it involves a solicitation for money), or local law enforcement. If you're involved in a Facebook or dating site scam, you are free to contact us direct; (571) 305-4056.   If you have a social security number, you can find information about Soldiers online at Caution-https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/appj/sc... < Caution-https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/appj/sc... > . While this is a free search, it does not help you locate a retiree, but it can tell you if the Soldier is active duty or not.  If more information is needed such as current duty station or location, you can contact the Commander Soldier's Records Data Center (SRDC) by phone or mail and they will help you locate individuals on active duty only, not retirees. There is a fee of $3.50 for businesses to use this service. The check or money order must be made out to the U.S. Treasury. It is not refundable. The address is:  Commander Soldier's Records Data Center (SRDC) 8899 East 56th Street Indianapolis, IN 46249-5301 Phone: 1-866-771-6357  In addition, it is not possible to remove social networking site profiles without legitimate proof of identity theft or a scam. If you suspect fraud on this site, take a screenshot of any advances for money or impersonations and report the account on the social networking platform immediately.  Please submit all information you have on this incident to Caution-www.ic3.gov < Caution-http://www.ic3.gov > (FBI website, Internet Criminal Complaint Center), immediately stop contact with the scammer (you are potentially providing them more information which can be used to scam you), and learn how to protect yourself against these scams at Caution-http://www.ftc.gov < Caution-http://www.ftc.gov > (Federal Trade Commission's website)

I was selected for a summer internship 2016.I tried to be very open while filling the preference form: I choose many products as my favorite products and I said I'm open about the team I want to join.I even was very open in the  location and start date to get host matching interviews (I negotiated the start date in the interview until both me and my host were happy.) You could ask your recruiter to review your form (there are very cool and could help you a lot since they have a bigger experience).Do a search on the potential team.Before the interviews,  try to find smart question that you are going to ask for the potential host (do a search on the team  to find nice and deep questions to impress your host). Prepare well your resume.You are very likely not going to get algorithm/data structure questions like in the first round. It's going to be just some friendly chat if you are lucky. If your potential team is working on something like machine learning, expect that  they are going to ask you questions about machine learning, courses related to machine learning you have and relevant experience (projects, internship). Of course you have to study that before the interview. Take as long time as you need if you feel rusty. It takes some time to get ready for the host matching (it's less than the technical interview)  but it's worth it of course.

Just register on the admission portal and during registration you will get an option for the entrance based course. Just register there. There is no separate form for DU CIC.

Assuming that you are talking about 1099-MISC.  Note that there are other 1099s.check this post - Form 1099 MISC Rules & RegulationsQuick answer - A Form 1099 MISC must be filed for each person to whom payment is made of:$600 or more for services performed for a trade or business by people not treated as employees;Rent or prizes and awards that are not for service ($600 or more) and royalties ($10 or more);any fishing boat proceeds,gross proceeds of $600, or more paid to an attorney during the year, orWithheld any federal income tax under the backup withholding rules regardless of the amount of the payment, etc.

I’m going to save my personal thoughts for the end, as I think it’s important to recap what Collins actually said first — for the simple reason that I feel that many are being tempted to respond to her vote more than her arguments.In the order that she made them:Resistance to Kavanaugh’s nomination emerged immediately, and was in many cases nakedly partisan (“one organization didn’t even bother to fill in the Judge’s name on its pre-written press release – they simply wrote that they opposed ‘Donald Trump’s nomination of XX to the Supreme Court of the United States’”).She voted in the affirmative for all of the last five nominees, including both of Obama’s. She sees her role as restricted to “the nominee’s qualifications” rather than their philosophy, “as long as that nominee’s philosophy is within the mainstream of judicial thought”.She outlined the lengths to which she went to examine Kavanaugh’s record, especially relative to concerns raised by her constituents (including ACA protections for preexisting conditions, the legality of prosecuting a sitting president, gay marriage, and abortion). Her view is that Kavanaugh’s record speaks to an independent judge who believes in severability, the universality of law, and the strong ground of precedent.An interesting factoid to that end: “That Judge Kavanaugh is more of a centrist than some of his critics maintain is reflected in the fact that he and Chief Judge Merrick Garland voted the same way in 93 percent of the cases that they heard together. Indeed, Chief Judge Garland joined in more than 96 percent of the majority opinions authored by Judge Kavanaugh, dissenting only once.” [EDIT: See this sterling answer from Archie D’Cruz that digs into this claim. In short, it’s thinner than the numbers would imply.]As it concerned the sexual assault accusations, she believes that the presumption of innocence is crucial. (The implication is that she’s worried that denying Kavanaugh purely on account of unproven, uncorroborated allegations will encourage a flood of baseless allegations against future nominees — including more like Swetnick’s, which Collins found “outlandish”.)As for Dr. Ford: “I found her testimony to be sincere, painful, and compelling. I believe that she is a survivor of a sexual assault and that this trauma has upended her life.”Even so, Collins couldn’t even get to a conclusion of “more likely than not”, largely because of four things: (1) the absence of any corroboration of the party ever having happened, (2) Ms. Keyser not even knowing who Kavanaugh was, (3) whoever drove Ford home never having come forward, (4) Ford having left, distraught, without having said goodbye, and this not having provoked a conversation with Ms. Keyser.She believes in the power of #MeToo: “The movement is real. It matters. It is needed. And it is long overdue. We know that rape and sexual assault are less likely to be reported to the police than other forms of assault. […] We must listen to survivors, and every day we must seek to stop the criminal behavior that has hurt so many. We owe this to ourselves, our children, and generations to come.”She welcomed the investigation into Ford’s allegations. But she feels that Ford was played in two ways: (1) the existence of her letter was leaked at a politically opportune time; (2) Grassley’s offer of a private testimony in California was seemingly never communicated to her.She’s adamant that she doesn’t believe that Feinstein orchestrated the leak. (For what it’s worth, The Intercept, who broke the story, said it wasn’t Feinstein or anyone on her staff.)Even so, Collins thinks the leak was politically motivated and that the responsible party should be ashamed: “You have taken a survivor who was not only entitled to your respect, but who also trusted you to protect her – and you have sacrificed her well-being in a misguided attempt to win whatever political crusade you think you are fighting. My only hope is that your callous act has turned this process into such a dysfunctional circus that it will cause the Senate – and indeed all Americans – to reconsider how we evaluate Supreme Court nominees. If that happens, then the appalling lack of compassion you afforded Professor Ford will at least have some unintended positive consequences.”My ThoughtsBeing honest, I agreed with nearly everything Collins said. It was a measured, thoughtful, well-informed speech.Where I disagreed was on what was left unsaid.Getting specific:While Collins provided examples of cases in which Kavanaugh ruled in contrast with his own political leanings, she failed to address the toxicity of his “revenge of the Clintons” comments. (I agree that he isn’t likely to shift much in his judicial philosophy because of this experience, but I disagree with the subject being skipped over.)More than 2,400 law professors signed onto a letter expressing concern about Kavanaugh’s “commitment to judicious inquiry”. This was never acknowledged or responded to.The FBI’s supplemental investigation lasted less than a week, was by all accounts heavily curtailed, and produced results which aren’t a matter of public record. This is antithetical to restoring public faith.Kavanaugh lied, under oath, repeatedly, with something approaching a casual contempt for what the phrase “under oath” implies. This was never so much as alluded to. (At minimum, he lied about never having blacked out and the meaning of “Renate alumnius”; he also “artfully misled” the committee about his underage drinking).All said, I thought Kavanaugh was a fine nominee. For all the hand-wringing about his time in Bush II’s White House, his judicial opinions have been well within conservative norms. Democrats should, in some respects, be thankful that Trump chose Kavanaugh over someone like Barrett. And as much as I found Dr. Ford’s testimony compelling, the presence of multiple discrepancies and the absence of corroboration do make it difficult to do much with her allegations.But for all of Collins’ professed concerns about process integrity and public faith, I can’t see how Kavanaugh’s lying is something you can skip on by. Had I only watched the hearing to the conclusion of Ford’s portion, I very well might have signed onto Collins’ speech in its entirety. But to pretend that the 90 minutes that followed either never happened or don’t matter is an invitation for the undecided public to decide against the integrity of the process and its result.Link to full speech: Senator Collins Announces She Will Vote to Confirm Judge KavanaughEDIT: I thought the below excerpt (from this New York Times piece) was worth noting. As I get into in the comments, I suspect that Collins was deeply hoping to find nothing objectionable in the FBI report (the narrow investigation working to her favor in that context). But spending five hours isn’t nothing. I don’t think that was purely for optics. While I deeply disagree with Collins about what she chose to overlook elsewise, it seems she was sincerely interested in following up on Dr. Ford’s allegations (if not those of Ramirez or Swetnick).