USSS was part of Treasury previously

*Haven't read the thread.


They were likely orders from higher up, but she was the only one dumbass enough to put it in writing.

Anyone surprised…..anyone?

MiamiHopper said:

---

So she's saying there were a bunch of incidents with homeowners that had Trump signs? Wonder what the incident reports describe.

---

I think if was more along the lines of: "If we approach a house with a Trump sign, there's likely to be an incident."

That was the excuse they used to not approach those houses at all.

Keller6Ag91 said:

---

Interesting that Aggie Roland is amplifying this story.

---

My guess is that the person fired was white, Roland would not be on this at all.

Ok, don't throw rocks at me, but... if you are getting hostility, verbal abuse, threats, etc... from Trump supporters - and I 100% believe she was - is it OK to avoid those homes?

WHY WOULD AGGIE ROLAND MARTIN HELP EXPOSE THIS?

I'M SO CONFUSED!

wrong thread.

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok, don't throw rocks at me, but... if you are getting hostility, verbal abuse, threats, etc... from some Trump supporters - and I 100% believe she was - is it OK to avoid all of those homes?

---

Added, bolded words are the thing. Not all Trump supporters would be abusive. Can't punish all of them because of "some".

What a terribly conducted interview.

It took me 15 minutes to figure out that she is essentially defending her actions. What I deduced is that someone somewhere with a Trump sign was hostile toward fema, so they're justified in using that political sign to classify a home as politically hostile and move on. Entire streets were too hostile. It's all happening because a trump supporter accepts the misinformation that $750 is being denied to some, to the point that they believe FEMA will actually take $750 from them (ie, they misunderstand how things work and are blinded by political hostility).

What I am sure of is that the fema worker feels threatened by a Trump sign because of their conditioning. That will justify their response, and the systematic response.

Lady is being made an example of, as she believes it's happening to show Trump FEMA is loyal to him. She probably right on that end. Trump needs to clean house.

FEMA had it in their handbook the equity needs to be considered when rendering aid.

TAMU1990 said:

---

FEMA had it in their handbook the equity needs to be considered when rendering aid.

---

This. The FEMA director made it clear she intended to use the power of her office to "correct inequities " of the past and they wonder why white residents met them with skepticism when they showed up in the Carolinas.

As someone that had family and friends significantly affected during Harvey, the chances of someone going off on FEMA as they walk up is slim and none. Especially that close after it happened. We were too busy about getting our **** together, picking up the pieces, and helping family and neighbors.

There was plenty of anger later on and that was usually directed at TWIA and flood insurance.

MooreTrucker said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok, don't throw rocks at me, but... if you are getting hostility, verbal abuse, threats, etc... from some Trump supporters - and I 100% believe she was - is it OK to avoid all of those homes?

---

Added, bolded words are the thing. Not all Trump supporters would be abusive. Can't punish all of them because of "some".

---

You don't know if you will be abused or threatened until you knock on the door.

So basically what you are saying is that you can't refuse to be harassed or abused based on a high probability you will be. You have to knock on each door and get what you get. If its 10-1 abuse in that area, well, that's just your problem.

Logos Stick said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok, don't throw rocks at me, but... if you are getting hostility, verbal abuse, threats, etc... from some Trump supporters - and I 100% believe she was - is it OK to avoid all of those homes?

---

Added, bolded words are the thing. Not all Trump supporters would be abusive. Can't punish all of them because of "some".

---

You don't know if you will be abused or threatened until you knock on the door.

So basically what you are saying is that you can't refuse to be harassed or abused based on a high probability you will be. You have to knock on each door and get what you get. If its 10-1 abuse in that area, well, that's just your problem.

---

High probability....LOL

Bookmark this. Trump has to deliver on getting to the bottom of this (as the president of the executive branch in which this falls under) and explain to the American people what really happened.

This is "draining the swamp" 101. People that supported him were literally targeted by a federal agency because of their support for him. if he doesn't care enough to investigate this then why should we trust him on anything else.

Ramdiesel said:

---

I was reading elsewhere that some of the people that worked for FEMA in the past liked to help themselves to other's property after disasters. I have no doubt that certain people might be hostile toward them coming to their property to "help" them after a natural disaster...

On top of that, when the government offers disaster relief to these people, it is more like a loan that has to be paid back or they seize their property at some point down the line..

It's almost like the government is taking advantage of these people in their worst time of need.

---

Big O might be funding it. Were her and the Rock there passing out free water?

TheEternalOptimist said:

---

WHY WOULD AGGIE ROLAND MARTIN HELP EXPOSE THIS?

I'M SO CONFUSED!

---

This is why I'm going to have to watch the whole damn interview.

Is Roland Martin doing journalism now?

MooreTrucker said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok, don't throw rocks at me, but... if you are getting hostility, verbal abuse, threats, etc... from some Trump supporters - and I 100% believe she was - is it OK to avoid all of those homes?

---

Added, bolded words are the thing. Not all Trump supporters would be abusive. Can't punish all of them because of "some".

---

You don't know if you will be abused or threatened until you knock on the door.

So basically what you are saying is that you can't refuse to be harassed or abused based on a high probability you will be. You have to knock on each door and get what you get. If its 10-1 abuse in that area, well, that's just your problem.

---

High probability....LOL

---

So no answer. OK.

If that's what you believe, fine. But I can see not wanting to get harassed on the job. It would be like me wearing a MAGA hat in DC! I'm gonna get harassed and cussed at and maybe physically assaulted. HIGH probability of it! I can see a lot of Trump supporters being combative and abusive with FEMA. To state otherwise is being disingenuous.

Logos Stick said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok, don't throw rocks at me, but... if you are getting hostility, verbal abuse, threats, etc... from some Trump supporters - and I 100% believe she was - is it OK to avoid all of those homes?

---

Added, bolded words are the thing. Not all Trump supporters would be abusive. Can't punish all of them because of "some".

---

You don't know if you will be abused or threatened until you knock on the door.

So basically what you are saying is that you can't refuse to be harassed or abused based on a high probability you will be. You have to knock on each door and get what you get. If its 10-1 abuse in that area, well, that's just your problem.

---

High probability....LOL

---

So no answer. OK.

If that's what you believe, fine. But I can see not wanting to get harassed on the job. It would be like me wearing a MAGA hat in DC! I'm gonna get harassed and cussed at and maybe physically assaulted. HIGH probability of it! I can see a lot of Trump supporters being combative and abusive with FEMA. To state otherwise is being disingenuous.

---

So missed the answer. OK.

Who determines "high probability"? This is not walking through a blue area with a MAGA hat on. This is going into a neighborhood that has been hit by a disaster, giving money to the people there. Not enough money, to be sure, but the probability of MAGA folks assaulting someone who is there to help is NOT as high as crazy libs assaulting some guy in a red hat. See the post above about MAGA folks actually helping in the disaster situation.

Now, they have been convinced by the MSM, etc., that they will be assaulted, but that's a different story, and should be irrelevant to the situation.

Honest question, do we need a FEMA? Is this not something that can be handled by state governments, state guards, literally anyone else?

I am now so overly suspicious of all federally-administered largesse, where winners and losers are picked based on politics.

After listening to that lady's story, I think she's got something with respect to FEMA.

If this lady is willing to be a FEMA whistleblower, heck, they should consider putting her in charge of FEMA.

Unfortunately, I don't think Roland Martin really knows what to do with her story because it doesn't fit his normal brand of journalism.

Could you imagine how hard the left would be imploding if Roland Martin got red-pilled?

Now would be the time to make the switch. This story could be his ticket.

it's almost like.. bureaucrats and government employees are biased against citizens who want smaller government and lower taxes because the government is inefficient, wasteful, and ineffective at spending their money and shouldn't keep growing and pretending to be an answer to solve every problem for everyone.

jrdaustin said:

---

Haven't watched it all, but her position is that a house with a Trump sign was likely to have "hostile" reception to FEMA. To the extent of greeting FEMA workers with "guns blazing". (Her words.)

---

Yeah, when they showed the little FEMA checklist that she sent out, all of the items were safety-related stuff ("Stay in groups"…"Hydrate often"…"Watch for downed power lines", etc.).
The "Don't approach houses with Trump signs" was on there, so I figured they'd take the stance that it was a safety tip, not a standalone politically-driven directive.

Definitely not excusing it and it's still inexcusable/unacceptable, but that does seem like that was the motive.

HollywoodBQ said:

---

TheEternalOptimist said:

---

WHY WOULD AGGIE ROLAND MARTIN HELP EXPOSE THIS?

I'M SO CONFUSED!

---

This is why I'm going to have to watch the whole damn interview.

Is Roland Martin doing journalism now?

---

Nope still the same shill queen he always is trying to find a race baiting angle since there are no poles to smoke or pillows to bite

Ghost91 said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

Haven't watched it all, but her position is that a house with a Trump sign was likely to have "hostile" reception to FEMA. To the extent of greeting FEMA workers with "guns blazing". (Her words.)

---

Yeah, when they showed the little FEMA checklist that she sent out, all of the items were safety-related stuff ("Stay in groups"…"Hydrate often"…"Watch for downed power lines", etc.).
The "Don't approach houses with Trump signs" was on there, so I figured they'd take the stance that it was a safety tip, not a standalone politically-driven directive.

Definitely not excusing it and it's still inexcusable/unacceptable, but that does seem like that was the motive.

---

It really would have to be both for it to be a thing. If not politically driven, why would they worry about safety?

MiamiHopper said:

---

So she's saying there were a bunch of incidents with homeowners that had Trump signs? Wonder what the incident reports describe.

---

Bunch of rednecks see a group of FEMA DEI hires pull up to their property and jump to the conclusion they are looters.

aggiemark99 said:

---

She is saying the avoided Trump supporter houses because Trump supporters had been "hostile" and that FEMA told them to avoid confrontation not specifically Trump supporters. This seems like a classic case of blaming the victim. Also sounds like she is covering her own rear. Doubt this will have legs.

---

This is what I actually took from the message. It was in a list of "best practices" that included don't go anywhere alone. There had also been reports of govt employees being threatened and (as we see on this board) right leaning people aren't very pro fed, especially towards DHS.

HOWEVER... her past history, along with much of the FEMA leadership, make it impossible to give any of them the benefit of the doubt. Even if they were completely politically neutral, it still would have been a bad order. Approach anyway, and if the homeowner is unfriendly, leave. Take a 3rd person or an LEO if you must, but don't just write people off because you're irrationally scared of them.

Ironically, these same group of people are largely de-fund the police types.

Jason C. said:

---

Honest question, do we need a FEMA? Is this not something that can be handled by state governments, state guards, literally anyone else?

I am now so overly suspicious of all federally-administered largesse, where winners and losers are picked based on politics.

---

If FEMA were staffed by ex-military (planners, ops and logistics guys), it would be a great planning and coordinating agency. Coordinate amongst the volunteer groups (cajun navy etc etc...), local govts (police, fire, ems, etc) and provide federal resources.

Instead it is run like a govt organization, largely filled with unqualified people just there for a paycheck.

Now the next "conspiracy theory" is the misallocation of FEMA funds to illegals. It's true. They already did it before when they raided Medicare/Medicaid to pay for EV tax credits. I guarantee you they did it all over the government. We just have to find it.

TheEternalOptimist said:

---

WHY WOULD AGGIE ROLAND MARTIN HELP EXPOSE THIS?

---

Because he believes it makes white Trump voters the villains. This is to defend the reprehensible practices of the marxists in power.

He's a ****ing liar and a racist.