longer version that includes defense and prosecution arguments as well has her bananas defense of her conduct.
Starting at 42:31 and going for about 2 minutes is a really stark example of how conspiracy theorists just do not care about the truth and will ignore evidence no matter how obvious.
Starting at around 1:45:12 and going on for about 2 minutes is a really good example of what not to do if you are speaking to a judge at your own sentencing hearing.
When bad people do good things they are generally seen as sinister, as if they are concealing a horrible action behind a facade of good will. So if you believe the government is fundamentally evil, and you see it trying to do something good (which is the whole purpose of FEMA) then its actions are going to look sinister to you. So stories about FEMA having camps (at their core, these are stories about the government using the facade of aid and assistance to hide something evil) will make sense to you because they are consistent with your sentiments about the what the government is. So too would stories about FEMA using disasters as a pretext for land snatching or stories about FEMA ignoring people in peril because these are all stories about an evil government. To the extent that they are consistent with your sentiments about the government, they are easy to accept as true, even if they contradict each other.