On his way out the door, the now-fired acting head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency defended its inadequate Biden-era disaster responses while taking some verbal jabs at the Trump administration.
Cameron Hamilton was called to the Department of Homeland Security headquarters in Washington, D.C., where he was dismissed by Deputy Homeland Security Secretary Troy Edgar and Corey Lewandowski, a senior adviser to President Donald Trump, Politico reported, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter.
The dismissal came just one day after Hamilton testified before a House Appropriations subcommittee, during which he appeared to contradict recent statements by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem regarding the possible elimination of FEMA and shifting funding for the agency to state-level emergency management, a move that Trump has been openly considering.
“I do not believe it is in the best interests of the American people to eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency,” Hamilton said at the hearing on Wednesday.
FEMA’s press office confirmed Hamilton’s dismissal.
“Effective today, David Richardson is now serving as the Senior Official Performing the duties of the FEMA Administrator,” a spokesperson said in an email while referencing the assistant secretary for the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office. “Cameron Hamilton is no longer serving in this capacity.”
Hamilton, a former Navy SEAL, contemplated resigning about two months ago as the new Trump administration was taking shape, until FEMA staff urged him to remain, Politico said, quoting an anonymous source.
Shortly after taking office, Trump’s DHS fired four FEMA officials for an “egregious” payment to illegal immigrants.
DHS officials told Fox News that “four employees are being fired today for circumventing leadership and unilaterally making the egregious payment for hotels for migrants in New York City.”
The firings come after Elon Musk wrote on X that “The DOGE team discovered that the agency sent “$59M LAST WEEK to luxury hotels in New York City to house illegal migrants.”
“That money is meant for American disaster relief and instead is being spent on high-end hotels for illegals. A clawback demand will be made today to recoup those funds,” Musk posted on X.
The finding came weeks after Trump announced plans to reform FEMA during a visit to North Carolina as many residents there continued their recovery from Hurricane Helene, which struck the state last fall.
“I’ll also be signing an executive order to begin the process of fundamentally reforming and overhauling FEMA, or maybe getting rid of FEMA,” Trump told reporters Friday morning during his visit. “I think, frankly, FEMA is not good.”
Trump also pledged that his administration would provide assistance to North Carolina to help repair the damage swiftly, assuring the state that he would “do a good job” in the recovery efforts.
“We’re going to fix it, and we’re going to fix it as fast as you can,” Trump said. “It’s a massive amount of damage. FEMA has really let us down. Let the country down. And I don’t know if that’s Biden’s fault or whose fault it is, but we’re going to take over. We’re going to do a good job.”
Trump also expressed a desire to see states take on more responsibility when disasters occur, arguing that local officials are better equipped to respond to and manage relief efforts. He promised to collaborate with three lawmakers from areas impacted by Hurricane Helene, criticizing FEMA for being “not on the ball” in aiding North Carolina’s recovery after the hurricane.
“So we’re going to be doing something on FEMA that I think most people agree [with],” Trump said. “I’d like to see the states take care of disasters, let the state take care of the tornadoes and the hurricanes and all of the other things that happen. And I think you’re going to find it a lot less expensive. You’ll do it for less than half, and you’re going to get a lot quicker response.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A Senate hearing on the surge of anti-Semitism on college campuses erupted into a fiery moral and ideological confrontation this week, led by Senator John Kennedy (R-LA).
Kennedy’s line of questioning, sharp and uncompromising, exposed the perceived moral confusion within academic and progressive circles regarding the Israel-Gaza conflict, all while the political shadow of Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) loomed over the proceedings.
Kennedy did not merely debate policy; he launched a cultural broadside against what he called the teaching of anti-Semitism in American universities, accusing institutional leaders of confusing “diversity, equity, and inclusion” with “the right to hurt Jews.”
The segment began with a direct and provocative line of inquiry aimed at a witness, Miss Solomon, who had connected the rise in anti-Semitism to the rhetoric of the previous administration.
Kennedy demanded clarification: “Did I understand you to testify that anti-Semitism is worse under the Trump administration?“
When the witness confirmed the increase in anti-Semitism since 2017, Kennedy pressed for a causal link: “Has the Trump administration caused that? Is that your testimony?“
The witness confirmed her belief in a causal connection, arguing that Trump had “highlighted and platformed neo-Nazis and white supremacists.“
Kennedy’s frustration was immediate. He immediately steered the discussion toward practical solutions, challenging the witness’s attempt to shift the focus to federal funding cuts to the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights.
“So, you think one way to stop anti-Semitism is to give people more money?” Kennedy pressed, highlighting the common political strategy of addressing crises with increased funding rather than tackling the underlying ideological currents.
The hearing reached its apex as Kennedy cited the chaotic and frequently hateful protests on campuses like Columbia, Berkeley, and UCLA. He refused to allow the witnesses to retreat into bureaucratic language about funding and investigation.
“What’s there to investigate? We see it!” Kennedy snapped, referring to the televised images of anti-Semitic rhetoric and hostile demonstrations.
He then delivered the line that crystallized his outrage over the perceived failure of academic leadership:
“It was clear to me that that the administration at Columbia and most members of the faculty believed passionately in diversity, equity, inclusion, and the right to hurt Jews.”
Kennedy’s choice of words was deliberate and visceral. He argued that the progressive framework of DEI had been weaponized to provide cover for hostility toward Jewish students under the guise of political protest and social justice activism. This was not a critique of political performance; it was a moral accusation aimed at the heart of America’s elite institutions.
When the witness attempted to defend the actions as merely “protesters for against the war in Gaza and them using some anti-Semitic slogans,” Kennedy refused to be swayed.
“No, don’t get off the subject on me now. You’re telling me that’s not what you saw?” he demanded.
Though Rep. Ilhan Omar was never explicitly named by Kennedy in his most searing accusations, her influence pulsed beneath the entire debate. To her critics, Omar’s unapologetic critiques of Israel, her framing of the Palestinian struggle, and her past controversial statements have provided the ideological spark—and subsequent political cover—for the radicalization seen on campuses.
Kennedy, however, distilled the issue to a simple moral challenge, one that directly confronts the moral relativism often used by Omar’s defenders:
“Let me ask you, let me ask you a question, Miss Kohab. Do you think it’s possible to feel compassionate… for the Palestinian people without hating Jews?”
This question cut through the political noise, challenging the moral logic underpinning the activist movements. Kennedy’s conviction was clear: in the current ideological climate, the line between advocating for the oppressed and targeting the Jewish community has been dangerously blurred by figures who prioritize performative outrage over moral clarity.
Kennedy’s patience finally snapped when a witness tried to defend the administration at Columbia, prompting one of the most memorable lines of the hearing.
“Are you telling me Colia, the Columbia administration and the faculty was supportive of the Jew?” Kennedy demanded, before delivering his searing indictment of the progressive worldview:
“We need to stop dipping into your ketamine stash… You can try to bubble wrap this, but that’s what I saw… If you want to stop a lot of the anti-semitism, maybe we need to stop teaching kids to be anti-semitic.”
This final charge accused America’s top universities of actively fostering an anti-Semitic environment through ideological bias. Kennedy’s message was unmistakable: When ideology overshadows accountability and moral logic, classrooms risk becoming breeding grounds for hate disguised as activism.
The hearing served as a dramatic cultural call-out, emphasizing that the problem of campus anti-Semitism is not merely a matter of lacking funds for investigation, but a symptom of a deeper moral decay that demands moral clarity and ideological responsibility from elected officials and academic leaders alike.