Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 2/28/2015 4:54:29 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fema-evidence-of-fraud-in-hurricane-sandy-reports/

Thousands of people who have been denied flood insurance claims for homes destroyed by Hurricane Sandy have been crying fraud. Now, the executive in charge of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's insurance program tells 60 Minutes he has seen evidence of fraud in reports used to deny them full insurance payouts.

You gotta read the entire article or see the 60 minutes report, but it doesn't say that FEMA is directly responsible but it does say the IG is going to look into the matter.

I imagine Congress too will look into the matter and that someone is in huge trouble.
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 2/28/2015 6:34:51 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

I imagine Congress too will look into the matter and that someone is in huge trouble.

Not a chance... all their hard drives were erased by accident.

K.

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 2/28/2015 7:04:57 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
Maybe somebody sold billion$ in faulty trailers, say like Katrina.

Maybe the govt. should fix all of that first hey ?

Among the many superlatives associated with Hurricane Katrina can now be added this one: it produced one of the most extraordinary displays of scams, schemes and stupefying bureaucratic bungles in modern history, costing taxpayers up to $2 billion.

Here

I don't recall anyone in 'huge trouble' over that. Did I miss something ?

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 2/28/2015 7:06:17 PM >

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 2/28/2015 7:16:27 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
I imagine Congress too will look into the matter and that someone is in huge trouble.

Not a chance... all their hard drives were erased by accident.
K.


I read on the internet the largest threat to computer hard drives is a subpoena.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 2/28/2015 7:24:22 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Maybe somebody sold billion$ in faulty trailers, say like Katrina.
Maybe the govt. should fix all of that first hey ?
Among the many superlatives associated with Hurricane Katrina can now be added this one: it produced one of the most extraordinary displays of scams, schemes and stupefying bureaucratic bungles in modern history, costing taxpayers up to $2 billion.
Here
I don't recall anyone in 'huge trouble' over that. Did I miss something ?


Apparently, you missed that in Katrina, it wasn't government committing the fraud, but Citizens and business trying to defraud government. In this article, it's about insurance companies trying to defraud Citizens (and, I assume, businesses). The money that is being paid out is a fund granted by the US Government, and meted out by FEMA. In this case, FEMA isn't being implicated in changing engineering reports to deny claims. Apparently, that's the insurance companies doing that. There may be someone within government guilty of advising those insurance companies to keep payouts down, or to doctor the engineering reports, but it's entirely possible that that didn't happen, too.

I highly doubt the Obama Administration had anything to do with this.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 2/28/2015 8:14:51 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Maybe somebody sold billion$ in faulty trailers, say like Katrina.
Maybe the govt. should fix all of that first hey ?
Among the many superlatives associated with Hurricane Katrina can now be added this one: it produced one of the most extraordinary displays of scams, schemes and stupefying bureaucratic bungles in modern history, costing taxpayers up to $2 billion.
Here
I don't recall anyone in 'huge trouble' over that. Did I miss something ?


Apparently, you missed that in Katrina, it wasn't government committing the fraud, but Citizens and business trying to defraud government. In this article, it's about insurance companies trying to defraud Citizens (and, I assume, businesses). The money that is being paid out is a fund granted by the US Government, and meted out by FEMA. In this case, FEMA isn't being implicated in changing engineering reports to deny claims. Apparently, that's the insurance companies doing that. There may be someone within government guilty of advising those insurance companies to keep payouts down, or to doctor the engineering reports, but it's entirely possible that that didn't happen, too.

I highly doubt the Obama Administration had anything to do with this.


For the most part, you are correct but for Katrina:

"While many people filed bogus claims, the growing roster of the accused goes beyond the usual con artists. It includes employees of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers, other public officials, business owners, even temporary workers for the Red Cross."

Seems govt. is far to lax in all of this. Estimates were as much as $1 billion was scammed.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 3:32:07 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

For the most part, you are correct but for Katrina:

"While many people filed bogus claims, the growing roster of the accused goes beyond the usual con artists. It includes employees of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers, other public officials, business owners, even temporary workers for the Red Cross."

Seems govt. is far to lax in all of this. Estimates were as much as $1 billion was scammed.


Its just tax money. I dont see what the big deal is... There is practically an endless supply of that. Trillions and trillions and trillions to be had.

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 4:20:49 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fema-evidence-of-fraud-in-hurricane-sandy-reports/

Thousands of people who have been denied flood insurance claims for homes destroyed by Hurricane Sandy have been crying fraud. Now, the executive in charge of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's insurance program tells 60 Minutes he has seen evidence of fraud in reports used to deny them full insurance payouts.

You gotta read the entire article or see the 60 minutes report, but it doesn't say that FEMA is directly responsible but it does say the IG is going to look into the matter.

I imagine Congress too will look into the matter and that someone is in huge trouble.


One has to prove someone else committed fraud to claim damages in court. Not the other way around. That the FEMA fund is in the hole for $23 billion should be dealt with by Congress ASAP. Then again, Congress has so many issues that are filed under' ASAP' that the 'wait log' is about 14 years! I can imagine people's frustration. Maybe we need to fire a few of these people in Congress for 'failure to perform'. What was their approval rating again, 8%?

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 6:11:34 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Maybe somebody sold billion$ in faulty trailers, say like Katrina.
Maybe the govt. should fix all of that first hey ?
Among the many superlatives associated with Hurricane Katrina can now be added this one: it produced one of the most extraordinary displays of scams, schemes and stupefying bureaucratic bungles in modern history, costing taxpayers up to $2 billion.
Here
I don't recall anyone in 'huge trouble' over that. Did I miss something ?

Apparently, you missed that in Katrina, it wasn't government committing the fraud, but Citizens and business trying to defraud government. In this article, it's about insurance companies trying to defraud Citizens (and, I assume, businesses). The money that is being paid out is a fund granted by the US Government, and meted out by FEMA. In this case, FEMA isn't being implicated in changing engineering reports to deny claims. Apparently, that's the insurance companies doing that. There may be someone within government guilty of advising those insurance companies to keep payouts down, or to doctor the engineering reports, but it's entirely possible that that didn't happen, too.
I highly doubt the Obama Administration had anything to do with this.

For the most part, you are correct but for Katrina:
"While many people filed bogus claims, the growing roster of the accused goes beyond the usual con artists. It includes employees of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers, other public officials, business owners, even temporary workers for the Red Cross."
Seems govt. is far to lax in all of this. Estimates were as much as $1 billion was scammed.


Even in those cases, they were defrauding government, not individuals.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 7:43:09 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
I think that what makes it a potential scandal is whom gave the word to industry to deny the claims. I have no clue that it was anyone in or outside the Administration, but since it appears to be industry wide, it begs to ask the question.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 8:08:05 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
I think that what makes it a potential scandal is whom gave the word to industry to deny the claims. I have no clue that it was anyone in or outside the Administration, but since it appears to be industry wide, it begs to ask the question.


It could very easily be the insurance companies acting on their own, too.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 8:29:59 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
That is why I said in or outside the administration

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 9:26:13 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

My uncle lived in Mahwah, one house away from the confluence of two rivers. He didn't "lose" his house, per se but everything was a loss except the second floor.

What's interesting is that it is common knowledge, to people that live in that area (I lived about 60 miles South, at the time), is that Sandy wasn't the "Super Storm" that the powers-that-be want us to believe it was. How so?

Well, that weekend, there was another event that occurred. About two miles up-river, in New York State (Mahwah is, literally, on the border. The next town to the North is Suffern, NY), there was a dam upon which the Army Corps of Engineers had been doing work for years. That particular weekend, the dam, gave way and caused most of the flooding into the local valley.

There has been a fight going on up there about whether or not the dam giving way was as a result of human error/poor engineering. Rumor Control has it that the failure had absolutely nothing to do with the storm and the storm, in-and-of-itself, would not have caused the damage that happened that weekend.

I don't claim to know facts, but it raises some interesting questions:

Fact: The dam DID fail/give way/whatever That weekend.

Fact: That area has weathered worse storms than Sandy before and after that weekend.

Based upon these facts:

Was the dam purposely sabotaged in order to allow the "SuperStorm" narrative?

Was the dam human error, making flood insurance a moot point since it wasn't an act of God that did all the damage?

Was the storm really that destructive all on its own and the failure of the dam is being brought up to mis-direct the government having to pay on that insurance?

Just some questions ...



Michael

ETA: Shit! I confused Irene and Sandy! I will leave this here because it may be germane but I will make another post about Sandy, since I was one of the people affected by that one.

Sandy caused me and my neighbors to be without power for nine days. I lived less than a mile from the Raritan River (New Brunswick, NJ), at the time. I had NO FLOODING. NO ONE in the surrounding areas that I talked to had so much as a leaky basement. Since I no longer live there, I will give the address for the people who wish to perpetually dismiss things out-of-hand. I lived at 378 Comstock Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901. You can Google it and see how close to the river I was.

None of the streets were flooded. There was an old tree, right down the block that was directly hit by a lightening strike that damaged one house, in particular but contributed nothing to the wide-spread "damage" that was reported, nation-wide.

Personally, I think we were used as a way to advance the "Global Warming" narrative because I had certainly seen worse storms there (Irene, obviously, comes to mind).

I think the whole thing was mass hysteria bullshit that was propped up by the memories of Irene (which, as I explained earlier, was also enhanced by facts that weren't widely disclosed).



M.P.C.


< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 3/1/2015 9:50:02 AM >


_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 4:12:23 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
That is why I said in or outside the administration


But, your title says otherwise...
    quote:

    FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 5:41:27 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
Probable doesn't mean it is a scandal Means it probably will be at some point in the future. Until then it is a news story on which I have an opinion.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 6:47:44 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
Probable doesn't mean it is a scandal Means it probably will be at some point in the future. Until then it is a news story on which I have an opinion.


I have no problem with anyone having an opinion, regardless of whether or not I agree with that opinion. If you're going to blame the Administration, have at it. If you're not blaming the Administration, or holding that they might not be involved, don't blame them. Remember: I'm no fan of this Administration.

By saying FEMA is the next probably Administration Scandal, you're saying that 1. it's a scandal of this Administration, and that it's probably the next one to be brought out in the media.

I'm saying I don't think it's a scandal of this Administration, making it not likely to be the next Administration scandal.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/1/2015 11:19:30 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
Could be right who knows. Hence the wording in my post. If the Administration isn't involved in corercing the insurance companies as a cost savings all well and good. If the Administration should have caught this before, not so good. If the insurance coluded to keep insurance claims down, not good. If they hid that information from the Administration in some manner not good. Lots of different options. Not sure yet which one fits. If, as I suspect, Congress gets into the act, they will look toward the Administration for the answers - hence probable scandal - because they will yell coverup.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/2/2015 2:18:07 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
Could be right who knows. Hence the wording in my post. If the Administration isn't involved in corercing the insurance companies as a cost savings all well and good. If the Administration should have caught this before, not so good. If the insurance coluded to keep insurance claims down, not good. If they hid that information from the Administration in some manner not good. Lots of different options. Not sure yet which one fits. If, as I suspect, Congress gets into the act, they will look toward the Administration for the answers - hence probable scandal - because they will yell coverup.


Congress will look at this Administration if it gets into the act, but not because of probably Administration malfeasance. Congress will look at this Administration simply because they are trying to destroy this Administration. IMO, there are plenty of things that tarnish this Administration without trying to pin every ill and woe that happens on it.

I don't believe the Administration would attempt to limit the amount of money paid out anyway. Shower those that lost greatly, and you'll win more votes than you lose. To be clear, I don't think this Administration cares much about average citizens beyond their votes. Passing out Big Gov largesse is easy, and a pretty safe bet towards winning people over.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/2/2015 6:41:09 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
Just sayin That is tatramount to buying votes. Just sayin

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal - 3/2/2015 10:37:53 AM   
Gauge


Posts: 5689
Joined: 6/17/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Could be right who knows. Hence the wording in my post. If the Administration isn't involved in corercing the insurance companies as a cost savings all well and good. If the Administration should have caught this before, not so good. If the insurance coluded to keep insurance claims down, not good. If they hid that information from the Administration in some manner not good. Lots of different options. Not sure yet which one fits. If, as I suspect, Congress gets into the act, they will look toward the Administration for the answers - hence probable scandal - because they will yell coverup.


Insurance companies have been fucking people out of money forever. You seriously think that this administration (inside, outside, above, below, to the side) TOLD them to do that?

_____________________________

"For there is no folly of the beast of the earth which is not infinitely outdone by the madness of men." Herman Melville - Moby Dick

I'm wearing my chicken suit and humming La Marseillaise.

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> FEMA The next probable Administration Scandal Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.174