View this post on the web at [link removed]

City officials were caught on undercover video openly admitting that diversity, equity and inclusion programs never actually stopped — they were just rebranded to dodge scrutiny — and now state lawmakers are taking notice.
The footage, released Tuesday morning by NC Political Tea [ [link removed] ]and our partners, watchdog group Accuracy in Media [ [link removed] ], shows government equity officers calmly explaining that while DEI language has changed, the underlying agenda continues uninterrupted.
“It’s not the words that matter,” one official says on camera. “It’s the work.” Another adds that executive orders and state laws merely forced “a change in nomenclature,” insisting the work “continues on regardless of what we may call things.”
The admissions are now fueling questions about whether local governments are deliberately skirting North Carolina’s anti-DEI laws, [ [link removed] ]which prohibit state and local agencies from using public funds to support DEI programs.
Accuracy in Media, a nonprofit investigative group founded in 1969, conducted the undercover interviews as part of a broader effort to expose what it describes as government noncompliance and public deception. AIM journalists posed as friendly interviewers while officials freely discussed how DEI initiatives were preserved behind the scenes.
What they captured was blunt.
Officials described “flexing with the time,” swapping out politically toxic words while keeping the same goals, training, and internal practices. One participant dismissed public backlash over renaming programs, repeating several times that the terminology doesn’t matter, but the “outcomes” do.
That logic may play well in bureaucratic back rooms, but it’s exactly the kind of reasoning lawmakers targeted when they passed DEI restrictions.
Under administrative law, regulators don’t judge programs by what agencies call them. They judge them by what they do, like discriminating against whites, Christians, or Jews.
If a program advances DEI objectives using public money, changing the label to “belonging,” “culture,” or “engagement” doesn’t make it legal.
There’s also the money issue.
If city employees are spending taxpayer-funded time, resources, or contract dollars on activities that officials themselves describe as continuing DEI, that could raise questions about unauthorized public spending. Cities in North Carolina don’t operate independently; they are subject to state law, and local policies that conflict with statutes can be overridden.
But until recently, enforcement was rare.
That’s no longer the case.
The North Carolina House Oversight Committee, now led by Rep. Brenden Jones, has launched an aggressive campaign investigating whether government agencies are violating state law — something observers say hasn’t happened at this scale in years.
Last month, lawmakers grilled [ [link removed] ]Chapel Hill–Carrboro City Schools, accusing the district of embedding DEI ideology into training and administration in violation of the Parents’ Bill of Rights and other statutes. T
he hearing sent a clear message: lawmakers aren’t accepting semantic gymnastics as compliance.
And the pressure is expanding.
A letter dated December 24, 2025, shows the House Oversight Committee has formally summoned Mecklenburg County Sheriff Gary McFadden to testify later this month.
Among the listed topics? Spending, strategic planning — and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives.
The letter, issued under statutory authority, requires advance written testimony and warns that failure to comply could limit or bar testimony altogether. The inclusion of DEI spending alongside public safety concerns signals lawmakers’ intent to closely examine whether law enforcement agencies are following the law.
That context gives the AIM footage new weight.
In the video, officials appear unfazed by legal restrictions, suggesting laws only forced cosmetic changes. But as legislative oversight ramps up, that confidence may be misplaced.
“If agencies are certifying compliance while privately admitting the work never stopped,” one government accountability advocate said, “that’s when oversight turns into enforcement.”
So far, Winston-Salem officials have not publicly responded to the video. Whether any agency will face penalties remains to be seen, and legal outcomes will depend on how regulators define prohibited conduct.
But one thing is clear: the era of quiet rebranding may be over.
With undercover footage circulating and lawmakers hauling officials before committees, North Carolina’s message to local government is clear: changing the words won’t change the law.

Unsubscribe [link removed]?