Prior to the two fires, Altadena and Pacific Palisades, I used to think our CA Dem government only had it in for the middle class. But this has proven they have it in for anyone and everyone who doesn't fit into the California they envision: a totalitarian empire funded by real estate companies and governed by greedy sociopaths who spout convenient ideology to make idiot voters think CA will be a virtuous heaven instead of the serf/overlord hell they're actually creating.
Indeed. Class warfare plays such a significant part for the Democrat party in this state. Their political agenda is always a perpetual war between victims (D) and victimizers (GOP). Which is why no matter how much money gets thrown at their agenda, nothing ever gets fixed and no amount of money is ever enough. Time for California voters to finally get off Democrat's sick and self-serving "class warfare" merry-go-round.
Fire aid should go to fire victims. Other organizations may be worthy of support, but this specific event was billed as Fire aid, therefore it should aid specifically fire victims.
One could either laugh or cry at the rip off of the money given to help the victims of the fire.
The part where it says the money would not go to the people who lost their homes, but to the low income marginalized native yada yada programs says it all.
I won’t even venture a comment on the Democrat party acting on the famous advice to to never waste a crisis. Money would much better have been given to Samaritans Purse or other organizations-dedicated to NOT squandering and misdirecting the contributed money.
Thank you Brent. And thank you David Bergerson for clearly revealing your thinking. Whenever I read something which uses the term “immigrant” when they should be saying “legal immigrant” and “illegal alien”, the goal of obfuscation is clear. Further, to use the concept of “proper documentation” like someone left their library card at home, I know the speaker is not acting in good faith.
Thank you for this article and pointing out to us how corrupt LA is under Newsome and Bass's leadership.
I don't understand how they can take land away that people own.
Did some people already sell their property?
Thank goodness we have people who will speak and actually sue Los Angeles for this corrupt and malicious handling of helping victims of the Palisades Fire,like Spencer Pratt. He is posting to social media several times a day. He is using his notary and his voice to challenge Newsome and help those who aren't being helped. Not like the preformers of Fire Aid who,I'm sure we're paid for the gig,and have done nothing to support the victims except show up and receive their cut.
The Californias fire are,it seems most likely,a power grab for land. As with the Paradise Fire which also wiped out an entire community. Some say that land was in the path of the now defunct,High Speed train to nowhere.
Too many things don't add up in this Palisades disaster such as
Karen Bass leaving for Uganda,no water,slow response and the list goes on.And as many guessed Newsome has a plan of low income housing on the properties.
Regarding Karen Bass she fired the Fire Chief as to not taking blame for the disaster. I'm not surprised that the Fire Aid money was distributed elsewhere as her past organizational involvement shows who she supports and what her end goal is.
Recent sale here was to a LA fire victim, who did choose to leave. House here was on the market for only a few days. One open house and it was sold. That is one LA family's story. Don't know if it also included the sale of their LA property or not.
Brent's article presents itself as an investigation into fire relief distribution, but beneath the surface lies a more troubling agenda that deserves direct examination. Rather than engaging in coded language and manufactured outrage, let's address what's really being argued here.
The piece spends considerable effort questioning why FireAid funds went to established nonprofits serving vulnerable communities rather than directly to affluent Palisades residents. But this reveals a fundamental misunderstanding—or deliberate misrepresentation—of how disaster relief typically functions. Major charitable organizations routinely distribute funds through established nonprofits with proven track records and existing infrastructure to serve affected communities effectively.
More concerning is Brent's transparent attempt to manufacture controversy around immigration. The article presents Mayor Bass's general comments about Los Angeles as evidence of misplaced priorities, then lists nonprofits serving immigrant communities as somehow inappropriate recipients of disaster relief funds. This framing is both disingenuous and revealing.
Here's the uncomfortable truth Brent dances around: this isn't really about fire relief efficiency or bureaucratic delays. It's about resentment that charitable funds might benefit anyone other than wealthy homeowners, particularly if those beneficiaries include immigrants or other marginalized communities. The repeated emphasis on $3 million home values isn't incidental—it's designed to highlight who Brent believes deserves help and who doesn't.
The suggestion that organizations serving "linguistically and culturally sensitive" communities or those "impacted by immigration policies" are somehow undeserving of disaster relief reveals the article's true agenda. Disasters don't discriminate based on immigration status or income level. Undocumented workers lost homes too. Service workers who cleaned those $3 million houses, landscaped those properties, and worked in local businesses were also displaced. They deserve support as much as any homeowner.
If Brent genuinely believes immigrants are undeserving of disaster relief, they should state that position directly rather than hiding behind procedural complaints and selective outrage about nonprofit funding. At least such honesty would allow for a real debate about values rather than this smoke-and-mirrors approach.
The real questions worth asking are different: Are the nonprofits effectively serving fire victims from all backgrounds? Is the permitting process genuinely too slow, and if so, what specific reforms would help? How can we ensure both immediate relief and long-term recovery serve entire affected communities?
Instead, we get conspiracy theories about foundation politics and thinly veiled resentment that disaster relief might benefit people the author apparently considers unworthy. This kind of divisive framing helps no one recover from tragedy.
Disaster relief should be about helping all affected community members rebuild their lives, regardless of their documentation status, income level, or how long they've lived in an area. If that principle bothers someone, they should own that position rather than dressing it up as procedural concern. Honest disagreement about priorities is preferable to manufactured outrage designed to obscure the real argument being made.
This isn't about Brent manufacturing outrage, it's about you, David, putting your virtue on display. Fires are equal opportunity destroyers. The fact is, the people whose homes were destroyed in the Palisades fire happened, in many cases, to be wealthy. Fire relief aid should be for fire victims. Not victims of other things - that relief should be clearly raised for that specific disaster or problem. I have no problem with aid to the homeless. Or to immigrants. I have a problem with aid that was specifically raised for people who lost their homes in the Palisades fire being given to people who were not directly affected by the fire by losing their home. And don't bother with saying they were affected because they can't afford a home.
I have no idea what “faux outrage” you're talking about and I suspect you don't either. Brent wrote about the actual distribution, not what's on their website. You're very intent on showing your moral superiority, so show it and uncover some actual facts about the actual distribution of funds. Thank you in advance.
You and Brent are making a serious allegation of financial fraud without providing any supporting evidence. Multiple independent investigations by major news outlets, professional auditing by KPMG, and third-party vetting by Goldman Sachs all confirm FireAid's proper fund distribution. If you have specific evidence contradicting these professional audits and journalistic investigations, please provide it. Otherwise, unsupported claims don't warrant detailed responses.
DB: It was a massive bait and switch no matter how you try to paper it over now. Which undermines future charitable giving, after a disaster like the LA fires. You almost sound like you were a beneficiary of this fund-raising. Any disclosures you care to make?
That's quite a leap to make. Are you familiar with how NGOs typically operate during disaster relief?
I've unfortunately witnessed numerous fundraising efforts following natural disasters—from hurricanes in Florida to our own emergencies here in Santa Barbara. In my experience, funds are never distributed dollar-for-dollar exactly as donors might envision. This reality stems from necessary operational overhead and the inherently subjective nature of determining disbursements and priorities.
Regarding your disclosure request, that's an inappropriate deflection tactic. My argument stands on its own merits, regardless of any perceived affiliations. Attempting to discredit a position by questioning the messenger rather than addressing the substance weakens the discussion. The validity of these points doesn't depend on who's making them.
Goldman Sachs is auditing?! I mean, aren't they universally trusted in philanthropy? So what if they bribe politicians, looted Libya, and got their golden girl Hillary Clinton to regime change that country and leave it in chaos.
The Fire Aid concert then was a scam plain and simple.
People bought very expensive tickets and did so under the guise that it was going to help the victims of the Fires yet they took these people's hard earned donations and decided to shift other people's money to other organizations.
If my donations to the charities I currently donate to, did this I would pull my funding immediately.
These People in charge of Fire Aid took advantage of people's kindness and willingness to help others and the ultimate goal was to fund their desired organizations and no intent of helping the victims of these fires.
Read where the money went. Got to love the armchair quarterbacks screaming at the TV. Ironically they are screaming at it when it is turned off. So much hatred, so much anger in people.
I don't understand your point. I refrained from saying your post was just a bunch of word salad but going to throw it out there now as the talking point of no compassion is being thrown out to me
Are you saying no compassion as to whom?
As you say reading is fundamental my compassion is shown throughout my post for the Fire Victims who are being scammed by their government and receiving no funds/ donations promised to them and the inability to rebuild their homes on their property. Are they homeless and now without shelter? How many lost their lives? How do their families support themselves without those family members? Just because you've lived in an expensive area doesn't mean you have the means to rebuild your home,as Spencer Pratt and his parents lost their homes in the fire area struggling with right now
It is a waste of energy to respond to Bergerson and his ilk. Is it not idiotic to turn a discussion of the waste of donations made to aid fire victims into a commentary on racism? Truly a moron.
With all due respect, that is an arrogant and absurd reply that unabashedly attempts to diminish the FACTS stated in Brent's letter. Do you factually dispute what he reported or are you concerned that some objective free thinking reader may draw obvious conclusions that vary with a liberal narrative?
We can read facts and data while drawing our own conclusions without being lectured to:
"...we get conspiracy theories about foundation politics and thinly veiled resentment that disaster relief might benefit people the author apparently considers unworthy. This kind of divisive framing helps no one recover from tragedy."
"Disaster relief should be about helping all affected community members rebuild their lives, regardless of their documentation status, income level..." Really? Thanks for that. I foolishly assumed those donating time and money to Fire Aid was intended to benefit both directly and indirectly his the victims of that specific fire..."
Good grief.
My objection to your letter is not that you have another (Liberal) perspective, but to your attempt to diminish Brent's credibility and character while telling the reader not believe their lying eyes is insulting.
In other news, did you hear that Trump colluded with the Russians....???
I believe there's significant confusion here regarding Brent's credibility. The fundamental issue is that Brent appears to have relied solely on headlines rather than examining primary sources. This approach undermines the reliability of his claims.
A credible analysis would have included consultation with the organizations that actually disbursed the funds and the auditors who reviewed the distribution process. Without this foundational research, what Brent presented were opinions rather than verified facts.
The concern is that this approach—reading headlines, accepting them without verification, and bypassing primary sources—creates manufactured outrage rather than informed discussion. When someone ignores the actual disbursing organizations and the audit trail, it raises questions about whether they're seeking truth or advancing a predetermined narrative.
It's not my concern what conservatives and liberals fight over, their culture war is their own to fight [Catholic Monarchism gang], but this "free thinking reader" label is precisely why I call people like you "common sense types" sarcastically.
There are so many other important issues that you are clearly unable to see specificially the Palisades and Altedena Fires and the Fire Aid promised to them.
This is about our neighbors down South and many who have moved here. Maybe you don't Remember the Thomas Fire and mudslides and how it affected our community and the devastation and death that it brought with it.
Hmmm. Your virtue signals are crass and shallow. Were the undocumented, the low income groups, or whatever you may chose, actually affected by the involved fire event? If so, they qualify. If not, the funds are not meant for them at all. By personal observation, my little house in Santa Maria has an alleged value of near $800,000. But it is subject to a mortgage. And I could not afford to live in a similar house as my fixed pension incomes put me at just above the county's poverty line. I am 82 years old, disabled, and if my home were to burn down, I would be completely displaced. So if there were a hand out offered to help me, I would gratefully accept. Some other completely untouched person should not be given some 'feel good about it all' help based upon their 'status'. And, yes, the bureaucratic assistance is dreadfully slow....almost criminally so.
I understand your perspective on eligibility being tied to direct impact. You raise valid concerns about your own vulnerability despite your property value - being on a fixed income with significant mortgage obligations would indeed make fire displacement catastrophic.
However, I'd encourage considering the broader scope of impact from these fires. The Eaton fire burned 22 square miles (7,500 structures) and the Palisades fire burned 37 square miles (9,400 structures). To put this in perspective, all of Santa Maria is 23 square miles.
The economic disruption extends far beyond homeowners. Workers who cleaned homes, maintained landscapes, staffed local businesses - many lost their livelihoods even if their own homes were spared. Additionally, some residents whose homes didn't burn still can't return due to toxic contamination requiring expensive remediation that insurance may not fully cover.
Regarding your situation, these fires highlighted how many people were underinsured - with policies covering replacement at $200/sq ft when actual rebuilding costs $1,000/sq ft. Given your concerns, it might be worth reviewing your coverage.
On government assistance: the delays are indeed frustrating. Much of the holdup stems from insurance companies rather than government agencies. If you believe stronger regulation of insurers would expedite claims, that's a valid policy discussion - though I recognize there are different views on business regulation.
Your point about targeting aid to those actually affected is well-taken. The challenge lies in fairly defining "affected" in such a widespread disaster.
DB: There was no "manufactured controversy about "immigration" in this article. Simply stated the facts, and exposing the cognitive dissonance Democrats keep demanding from voters in California .
Since "wealthy" Palisades home owners displaced by the fire was the entire point and appeal of the Fire-Air concerts, why did this fund-raising operation run such a material a bait and switch when it came time to actually distribute those funds?
There is no justification for that, except exploiting this constant Democrat drone of manufactured class warfare anyway they can manufacture it.
Why are you changing the topic? Are you even paying attention to the topic at all?
My response was that Brent's rant was a guise to complain about immigrants. He used the fire and the numerous responses to the events to claim that immigrants are getting free money.
DB: Since Democrat dogma asserts we are ALL immigrants, where is my check for free stuff? Or do you wish to clarify your overly broad use of the term "immigrants"?
The topic is Brent's usage of the fires to complain about immigrants. That is it. Nothing more, nothing less. So, go and argue with him about what he defines as immigrants.
Correction DB. You changed the topic, to claim it is the author is complaining about "immigrants". But you got one thing right, I am probably the most vocabulary-challenged poster you will find anywhere. Keep me on my toes, DB.
I have NOT changed the topic. You are responding to a thread. The head of the thread is MY response to Brent's rant. This is what I wrote, "More concerning is Brent's transparent attempt to manufacture controversy around immigration. The article presents Mayor Bass's general comments about Los Angeles as evidence of misplaced priorities, then lists nonprofits serving immigrant communities as somehow inappropriate recipients of disaster relief funds. This framing is both disingenuous and revealing."
There was a fund raiser and $100 Million was collected to help the victims of the fire.
Not one penny has gone to those people.
It looks like a scam, an illegal taking of money, and people need to go to jail.
If Bass, anyone associated with the City of Los Angeles, the State of Calif. or ANY DEMOCRAT ASSOCIATED ORGANIZATION help deceive, received any of the $100 Mil or are associated with PR FIRMS not directed to hand out the money from the original fund raisers should go to jail.
There should be substantial fines for ANY non-profit that has been given money and the heads of these NGO's directors or staffs.
Talk about deceptive and illegal. Where is Newsom calling for criminal action?
These NGOs are under the control of IRS rules and Secratary of State regulation. And California’s SOS is no doubt, very pleased with all NGOs that gives money to democrat causes. It’s a captured system. NGOs like the FED, need to be ended.
IF WE DIDN’T HAVE DEI WE COULD FIGHT THE FIRES. TRUMP SHOULD DEPORT ALL THE PEOPLE WHO PUT DEI IN THE FIRE BRIGADES TO ALAGATOR ALCATRAZ WITH TRAITOROUS GAVIN NEWSOME SO WE CAN GO BACK TO WINNING
Instead trying to rebuild everything, perhaps it would be better for the City or county to buy up the remaining land and convert it to parks and a beach boulevard with a restaurant or two and some parking for visitors.
Before donating to any charity, check our their ranking on Charity Navigator so there are fewer surprises later learning how much went to "administrative overhead" or ultimately subjective priorities and distributees:
Spencer Pratt on instagram has some interesting posts regarding the mishandling of the Eaton and Palisades fire. The voicemail that Pratt posted that Karen Bass left a friend PRIOR to the fire was especially damning.
Why do we still not know the origins of this fire, and its proximity to a vagrant camp fire in this exact same area a few days prior? I thought "fire science" was far better equipped to provide this critical information by now.
Insurance cancellations could have come from the sheer numbers of verified vagrant camp fires already recorded in this volatile area. And the refusal of the city/county to do anything about them.
These NGOs are under the control of IRS rules and Secratary of State regulation. And California’s SOS is no doubt, very pleased with all NGOs that donate to democrat causes. It’s a captured system. NGOs like the FED, need to be ended.
What a scam these NGOs are. They ought to be eliminated including religious 501s because the whole set up engenders fraud. There are even rules against having family members on your 501 boards, which the Annenbergs clearly for got to obey.
Prior to the two fires, Altadena and Pacific Palisades, I used to think our CA Dem government only had it in for the middle class. But this has proven they have it in for anyone and everyone who doesn't fit into the California they envision: a totalitarian empire funded by real estate companies and governed by greedy sociopaths who spout convenient ideology to make idiot voters think CA will be a virtuous heaven instead of the serf/overlord hell they're actually creating.
Indeed. Class warfare plays such a significant part for the Democrat party in this state. Their political agenda is always a perpetual war between victims (D) and victimizers (GOP). Which is why no matter how much money gets thrown at their agenda, nothing ever gets fixed and no amount of money is ever enough. Time for California voters to finally get off Democrat's sick and self-serving "class warfare" merry-go-round.
Fire aid should go to fire victims. Other organizations may be worthy of support, but this specific event was billed as Fire aid, therefore it should aid specifically fire victims.
Brent- Thank you for the startling summation of yet another example of how corrupt the state of California is.
One could either laugh or cry at the rip off of the money given to help the victims of the fire.
The part where it says the money would not go to the people who lost their homes, but to the low income marginalized native yada yada programs says it all.
I won’t even venture a comment on the Democrat party acting on the famous advice to to never waste a crisis. Money would much better have been given to Samaritans Purse or other organizations-dedicated to NOT squandering and misdirecting the contributed money.
Thank you Brent. And thank you David Bergerson for clearly revealing your thinking. Whenever I read something which uses the term “immigrant” when they should be saying “legal immigrant” and “illegal alien”, the goal of obfuscation is clear. Further, to use the concept of “proper documentation” like someone left their library card at home, I know the speaker is not acting in good faith.
Berney
Thank you for this article and pointing out to us how corrupt LA is under Newsome and Bass's leadership.
I don't understand how they can take land away that people own.
Did some people already sell their property?
Thank goodness we have people who will speak and actually sue Los Angeles for this corrupt and malicious handling of helping victims of the Palisades Fire,like Spencer Pratt. He is posting to social media several times a day. He is using his notary and his voice to challenge Newsome and help those who aren't being helped. Not like the preformers of Fire Aid who,I'm sure we're paid for the gig,and have done nothing to support the victims except show up and receive their cut.
The Californias fire are,it seems most likely,a power grab for land. As with the Paradise Fire which also wiped out an entire community. Some say that land was in the path of the now defunct,High Speed train to nowhere.
Too many things don't add up in this Palisades disaster such as
Karen Bass leaving for Uganda,no water,slow response and the list goes on.And as many guessed Newsome has a plan of low income housing on the properties.
Regarding Karen Bass she fired the Fire Chief as to not taking blame for the disaster. I'm not surprised that the Fire Aid money was distributed elsewhere as her past organizational involvement shows who she supports and what her end goal is.
Recent sale here was to a LA fire victim, who did choose to leave. House here was on the market for only a few days. One open house and it was sold. That is one LA family's story. Don't know if it also included the sale of their LA property or not.
WE SHOULD DEPORT ALL THE EVIL ILLEGALS AND DEMOCRATS WHO START THESE FIRES TO SAVE OUR COMMUNITIES
Brent's article presents itself as an investigation into fire relief distribution, but beneath the surface lies a more troubling agenda that deserves direct examination. Rather than engaging in coded language and manufactured outrage, let's address what's really being argued here.
The piece spends considerable effort questioning why FireAid funds went to established nonprofits serving vulnerable communities rather than directly to affluent Palisades residents. But this reveals a fundamental misunderstanding—or deliberate misrepresentation—of how disaster relief typically functions. Major charitable organizations routinely distribute funds through established nonprofits with proven track records and existing infrastructure to serve affected communities effectively.
More concerning is Brent's transparent attempt to manufacture controversy around immigration. The article presents Mayor Bass's general comments about Los Angeles as evidence of misplaced priorities, then lists nonprofits serving immigrant communities as somehow inappropriate recipients of disaster relief funds. This framing is both disingenuous and revealing.
Here's the uncomfortable truth Brent dances around: this isn't really about fire relief efficiency or bureaucratic delays. It's about resentment that charitable funds might benefit anyone other than wealthy homeowners, particularly if those beneficiaries include immigrants or other marginalized communities. The repeated emphasis on $3 million home values isn't incidental—it's designed to highlight who Brent believes deserves help and who doesn't.
The suggestion that organizations serving "linguistically and culturally sensitive" communities or those "impacted by immigration policies" are somehow undeserving of disaster relief reveals the article's true agenda. Disasters don't discriminate based on immigration status or income level. Undocumented workers lost homes too. Service workers who cleaned those $3 million houses, landscaped those properties, and worked in local businesses were also displaced. They deserve support as much as any homeowner.
If Brent genuinely believes immigrants are undeserving of disaster relief, they should state that position directly rather than hiding behind procedural complaints and selective outrage about nonprofit funding. At least such honesty would allow for a real debate about values rather than this smoke-and-mirrors approach.
The real questions worth asking are different: Are the nonprofits effectively serving fire victims from all backgrounds? Is the permitting process genuinely too slow, and if so, what specific reforms would help? How can we ensure both immediate relief and long-term recovery serve entire affected communities?
Instead, we get conspiracy theories about foundation politics and thinly veiled resentment that disaster relief might benefit people the author apparently considers unworthy. This kind of divisive framing helps no one recover from tragedy.
Disaster relief should be about helping all affected community members rebuild their lives, regardless of their documentation status, income level, or how long they've lived in an area. If that principle bothers someone, they should own that position rather than dressing it up as procedural concern. Honest disagreement about priorities is preferable to manufactured outrage designed to obscure the real argument being made.
This isn't about Brent manufacturing outrage, it's about you, David, putting your virtue on display. Fires are equal opportunity destroyers. The fact is, the people whose homes were destroyed in the Palisades fire happened, in many cases, to be wealthy. Fire relief aid should be for fire victims. Not victims of other things - that relief should be clearly raised for that specific disaster or problem. I have no problem with aid to the homeless. Or to immigrants. I have a problem with aid that was specifically raised for people who lost their homes in the Palisades fire being given to people who were not directly affected by the fire by losing their home. And don't bother with saying they were affected because they can't afford a home.
Good point.
And yet you prove my point. Brent did create faux outrage.
https://www.fireaidla.org/
Reading is fundamental.
I have no idea what “faux outrage” you're talking about and I suspect you don't either. Brent wrote about the actual distribution, not what's on their website. You're very intent on showing your moral superiority, so show it and uncover some actual facts about the actual distribution of funds. Thank you in advance.
You and Brent are making a serious allegation of financial fraud without providing any supporting evidence. Multiple independent investigations by major news outlets, professional auditing by KPMG, and third-party vetting by Goldman Sachs all confirm FireAid's proper fund distribution. If you have specific evidence contradicting these professional audits and journalistic investigations, please provide it. Otherwise, unsupported claims don't warrant detailed responses.
DB: It was a massive bait and switch no matter how you try to paper it over now. Which undermines future charitable giving, after a disaster like the LA fires. You almost sound like you were a beneficiary of this fund-raising. Any disclosures you care to make?
That's quite a leap to make. Are you familiar with how NGOs typically operate during disaster relief?
I've unfortunately witnessed numerous fundraising efforts following natural disasters—from hurricanes in Florida to our own emergencies here in Santa Barbara. In my experience, funds are never distributed dollar-for-dollar exactly as donors might envision. This reality stems from necessary operational overhead and the inherently subjective nature of determining disbursements and priorities.
Regarding your disclosure request, that's an inappropriate deflection tactic. My argument stands on its own merits, regardless of any perceived affiliations. Attempting to discredit a position by questioning the messenger rather than addressing the substance weakens the discussion. The validity of these points doesn't depend on who's making them.
https://www.westsidecurrent.com/news/fire-aid-concerts-net-100-million-palisades-fire-victims-ask-where-s-the-money/article_92335653-1b27-41bb-ac15-c020679d25c9.html.
DB: your brain is wired to manufacture class warfare, any place you can exploit if for your own political agenda.
Goldman Sachs is auditing?! I mean, aren't they universally trusted in philanthropy? So what if they bribe politicians, looted Libya, and got their golden girl Hillary Clinton to regime change that country and leave it in chaos.
Right on Polly. So the homeowners were wealthy - so what!
The Fire Aid concert then was a scam plain and simple.
People bought very expensive tickets and did so under the guise that it was going to help the victims of the Fires yet they took these people's hard earned donations and decided to shift other people's money to other organizations.
If my donations to the charities I currently donate to, did this I would pull my funding immediately.
These People in charge of Fire Aid took advantage of people's kindness and willingness to help others and the ultimate goal was to fund their desired organizations and no intent of helping the victims of these fires.
https://www.fireaidla.org/
Read where the money went. Got to love the armchair quarterbacks screaming at the TV. Ironically they are screaming at it when it is turned off. So much hatred, so much anger in people.
I don't understand your point. I refrained from saying your post was just a bunch of word salad but going to throw it out there now as the talking point of no compassion is being thrown out to me
Are you saying no compassion as to whom?
As you say reading is fundamental my compassion is shown throughout my post for the Fire Victims who are being scammed by their government and receiving no funds/ donations promised to them and the inability to rebuild their homes on their property. Are they homeless and now without shelter? How many lost their lives? How do their families support themselves without those family members? Just because you've lived in an expensive area doesn't mean you have the means to rebuild your home,as Spencer Pratt and his parents lost their homes in the fire area struggling with right now
P.S. I'm not sitting in an armchair.
What government scammed the people?
Bass,Newsome etc.......
They did not raise funds.
They did not disburse funds.
Sounds like you have an agenda.
Sounds like you have an answer, hunting for a question.
Idiot
Your intellect amazes me.
JB: Your perspicacity dazzles me.
It is a waste of energy to respond to Bergerson and his ilk. Is it not idiotic to turn a discussion of the waste of donations made to aid fire victims into a commentary on racism? Truly a moron.
With all due respect, that is an arrogant and absurd reply that unabashedly attempts to diminish the FACTS stated in Brent's letter. Do you factually dispute what he reported or are you concerned that some objective free thinking reader may draw obvious conclusions that vary with a liberal narrative?
We can read facts and data while drawing our own conclusions without being lectured to:
"...we get conspiracy theories about foundation politics and thinly veiled resentment that disaster relief might benefit people the author apparently considers unworthy. This kind of divisive framing helps no one recover from tragedy."
"Disaster relief should be about helping all affected community members rebuild their lives, regardless of their documentation status, income level..." Really? Thanks for that. I foolishly assumed those donating time and money to Fire Aid was intended to benefit both directly and indirectly his the victims of that specific fire..."
Good grief.
My objection to your letter is not that you have another (Liberal) perspective, but to your attempt to diminish Brent's credibility and character while telling the reader not believe their lying eyes is insulting.
In other news, did you hear that Trump colluded with the Russians....???
I believe there's significant confusion here regarding Brent's credibility. The fundamental issue is that Brent appears to have relied solely on headlines rather than examining primary sources. This approach undermines the reliability of his claims.
A credible analysis would have included consultation with the organizations that actually disbursed the funds and the auditors who reviewed the distribution process. Without this foundational research, what Brent presented were opinions rather than verified facts.
The concern is that this approach—reading headlines, accepting them without verification, and bypassing primary sources—creates manufactured outrage rather than informed discussion. When someone ignores the actual disbursing organizations and the audit trail, it raises questions about whether they're seeking truth or advancing a predetermined narrative.
https://notthebee.com/article/so-where-did-all-the-fireaid-money-go-after-the-la-wildfires.
"free thinking reader"
It's not my concern what conservatives and liberals fight over, their culture war is their own to fight [Catholic Monarchism gang], but this "free thinking reader" label is precisely why I call people like you "common sense types" sarcastically.
Good to know. Yawn.
The other news I'm waiting for is from an island.
Funny. Cuz when you get it you won't like it.
I will no matter what. So will Kim Jong Un.
That's a good deflection from the topic at hand.
There are so many other important issues that you are clearly unable to see specificially the Palisades and Altedena Fires and the Fire Aid promised to them.
This is about our neighbors down South and many who have moved here. Maybe you don't Remember the Thomas Fire and mudslides and how it affected our community and the devastation and death that it brought with it.
Thanks for making this thread longer.
Hmmm. Your virtue signals are crass and shallow. Were the undocumented, the low income groups, or whatever you may chose, actually affected by the involved fire event? If so, they qualify. If not, the funds are not meant for them at all. By personal observation, my little house in Santa Maria has an alleged value of near $800,000. But it is subject to a mortgage. And I could not afford to live in a similar house as my fixed pension incomes put me at just above the county's poverty line. I am 82 years old, disabled, and if my home were to burn down, I would be completely displaced. So if there were a hand out offered to help me, I would gratefully accept. Some other completely untouched person should not be given some 'feel good about it all' help based upon their 'status'. And, yes, the bureaucratic assistance is dreadfully slow....almost criminally so.
I understand your perspective on eligibility being tied to direct impact. You raise valid concerns about your own vulnerability despite your property value - being on a fixed income with significant mortgage obligations would indeed make fire displacement catastrophic.
However, I'd encourage considering the broader scope of impact from these fires. The Eaton fire burned 22 square miles (7,500 structures) and the Palisades fire burned 37 square miles (9,400 structures). To put this in perspective, all of Santa Maria is 23 square miles.
The economic disruption extends far beyond homeowners. Workers who cleaned homes, maintained landscapes, staffed local businesses - many lost their livelihoods even if their own homes were spared. Additionally, some residents whose homes didn't burn still can't return due to toxic contamination requiring expensive remediation that insurance may not fully cover.
Regarding your situation, these fires highlighted how many people were underinsured - with policies covering replacement at $200/sq ft when actual rebuilding costs $1,000/sq ft. Given your concerns, it might be worth reviewing your coverage.
On government assistance: the delays are indeed frustrating. Much of the holdup stems from insurance companies rather than government agencies. If you believe stronger regulation of insurers would expedite claims, that's a valid policy discussion - though I recognize there are different views on business regulation.
Your point about targeting aid to those actually affected is well-taken. The challenge lies in fairly defining "affected" in such a widespread disaster.
DB: There was no "manufactured controversy about "immigration" in this article. Simply stated the facts, and exposing the cognitive dissonance Democrats keep demanding from voters in California .
Since "wealthy" Palisades home owners displaced by the fire was the entire point and appeal of the Fire-Air concerts, why did this fund-raising operation run such a material a bait and switch when it came time to actually distribute those funds?
There is no justification for that, except exploiting this constant Democrat drone of manufactured class warfare anyway they can manufacture it.
Why are you changing the topic? Are you even paying attention to the topic at all?
My response was that Brent's rant was a guise to complain about immigrants. He used the fire and the numerous responses to the events to claim that immigrants are getting free money.
Yeah, well I'm complaining about illegal aliens too - send 'em home.
DB: Since Democrat dogma asserts we are ALL immigrants, where is my check for free stuff? Or do you wish to clarify your overly broad use of the term "immigrants"?
Are you having trouble understanding words?
The topic is Brent's usage of the fires to complain about immigrants. That is it. Nothing more, nothing less. So, go and argue with him about what he defines as immigrants.
Correction DB. You changed the topic, to claim it is the author is complaining about "immigrants". But you got one thing right, I am probably the most vocabulary-challenged poster you will find anywhere. Keep me on my toes, DB.
I have NOT changed the topic. You are responding to a thread. The head of the thread is MY response to Brent's rant. This is what I wrote, "More concerning is Brent's transparent attempt to manufacture controversy around immigration. The article presents Mayor Bass's general comments about Los Angeles as evidence of misplaced priorities, then lists nonprofits serving immigrant communities as somehow inappropriate recipients of disaster relief funds. This framing is both disingenuous and revealing."
Again, you are attempting to change the topic.
How about making it a short comment.
There was a fund raiser and $100 Million was collected to help the victims of the fire.
Not one penny has gone to those people.
It looks like a scam, an illegal taking of money, and people need to go to jail.
If Bass, anyone associated with the City of Los Angeles, the State of Calif. or ANY DEMOCRAT ASSOCIATED ORGANIZATION help deceive, received any of the $100 Mil or are associated with PR FIRMS not directed to hand out the money from the original fund raisers should go to jail.
There should be substantial fines for ANY non-profit that has been given money and the heads of these NGO's directors or staffs.
Talk about deceptive and illegal. Where is Newsom calling for criminal action?
These NGOs are under the control of IRS rules and Secratary of State regulation. And California’s SOS is no doubt, very pleased with all NGOs that gives money to democrat causes. It’s a captured system. NGOs like the FED, need to be ended.
Good read, Scott.
IF WE DIDN’T HAVE DEI WE COULD FIGHT THE FIRES. TRUMP SHOULD DEPORT ALL THE PEOPLE WHO PUT DEI IN THE FIRE BRIGADES TO ALAGATOR ALCATRAZ WITH TRAITOROUS GAVIN NEWSOME SO WE CAN GO BACK TO WINNING
Instead trying to rebuild everything, perhaps it would be better for the City or county to buy up the remaining land and convert it to parks and a beach boulevard with a restaurant or two and some parking for visitors.
I don’t know what you’re smoking but save me a puff.
Before donating to any charity, check our their ranking on Charity Navigator so there are fewer surprises later learning how much went to "administrative overhead" or ultimately subjective priorities and distributees:
https://www.charitynavigator.org
I do that.
Spencer Pratt on instagram has some interesting posts regarding the mishandling of the Eaton and Palisades fire. The voicemail that Pratt posted that Karen Bass left a friend PRIOR to the fire was especially damning.
Any link to that voicemail? I've heard nothing was posted.
It is on @spencerpratt
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DM5qI7Dph1V/?igsh=MWtpeWV5NHN0bW81dA==
Thank you. I wonder how he got that? And if it's real?
Why do we still not know the origins of this fire, and its proximity to a vagrant camp fire in this exact same area a few days prior? I thought "fire science" was far better equipped to provide this critical information by now.
The Fire Chief was fired yet Bass was in Uganda and no water in hydrants. Hmmmm.
Understand also that State Farm cancelled many insurers about 2 weeks prior to the fire.
For sure that fact will not be repeated often.
Insurance cancellations could have come from the sheer numbers of verified vagrant camp fires already recorded in this volatile area. And the refusal of the city/county to do anything about them.
These NGOs are under the control of IRS rules and Secratary of State regulation. And California’s SOS is no doubt, very pleased with all NGOs that donate to democrat causes. It’s a captured system. NGOs like the FED, need to be ended.
What a scam these NGOs are. They ought to be eliminated including religious 501s because the whole set up engenders fraud. There are even rules against having family members on your 501 boards, which the Annenbergs clearly for got to obey.
Title:
Los Angeles wildfires may be linked to 440 deaths, new research estimates
Link:
https://keyt.com/news/2025/08/06/los-angeles-wildfires-may-be-linked-to-440-deaths-new-research-estimates/
(Sent from NewsChannel 3-12)
******
Download NewsChannel 3-12 app now.
Play Store Link: http://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ibsys.app.npgb_sb