During a press briefing in August 2025, Washington D.C. Police Chief Pamela Smith was asked by a reporter about the “chain of command” following President Trump’s executive order to take federal control of the D.C. police force. The reporter’s question was framed around who now heads what, given the reshuffling of leadership roles.
Pamela Smith responded with:
“What does that mean?”
This phrase was interpreted by Sky News Australia and other conservative outlets as evidence that she didn’t understand the concept of a chain of command. However, according to reporting from the Times of India and DeepNewz, Smith was likely asking for clarification on the question itself -- not expressing ignorance of the term.
She later stated:
“I answer to Mayor Muriel Bowser… let us not have any controversy with that, OK, because I know people want to build upon and create division.”
So the “What does that mean?” moment was probably a request for specificity -- which chain of command? Under which authority? -- rather than a literal misunderstanding of the concept. But in the current political climate, especially with MAGA commentators eager to frame her as a “DEI hire,” the clip was weaponized to suggest incompetence.
đ DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives are designed to expand opportunity, not dilute standards. The core idea is that qualified candidates from historically marginalized groups often face systemic barriers—whether in hiring, promotion, or visibility -- and DEI seeks to correct for that. It’s about removing bias, not lowering the bar.
But in some political circles, especially among reactionary commentators, DEI has been reframed as a kind of anti-meritocracy, where identity supposedly trumps competence. That framing is not only misleading, it’s often racially coded -- implying that if someone is Black, Latina, Indigenous, etc., and in a position of authority, they must have gotten there through “special treatment” rather than skill or experience.
This logic:
Ignores the credentials of the person in question (Pamela Smith, for instance, has decades of law enforcement experience).
Assumes incompetence based on identity, which is textbook racism.
Weaponizes ambiguity -- like the “what does that mean?” moment -- as proof of unfitness, even when the full context suggests otherwise.
It’s a rhetorical sleight of hand: take a moment of hesitation or clarification, strip it of nuance, and plug it into a pre-existing narrative about “wokeness gone wrong.”
[end]
You're very willing to believe someone in a position of authority is unqualified because they are a minority. Because you are a racist.
Pamala Smith NEVER said, "what's a chain of command?" She asked "what's that mean" in regards to the reporter's question. Your "quote" in the title of your post is BS.
Via Copilot...
ReplyDeleteHere’s what actually happened...
During a press briefing in August 2025, Washington D.C. Police Chief Pamela Smith was asked by a reporter about the “chain of command” following President Trump’s executive order to take federal control of the D.C. police force. The reporter’s question was framed around who now heads what, given the reshuffling of leadership roles.
Pamela Smith responded with:
“What does that mean?”
This phrase was interpreted by Sky News Australia and other conservative outlets as evidence that she didn’t understand the concept of a chain of command. However, according to reporting from the Times of India and DeepNewz, Smith was likely asking for clarification on the question itself -- not expressing ignorance of the term.
She later stated:
“I answer to Mayor Muriel Bowser… let us not have any controversy with that, OK, because I know people want to build upon and create division.”
So the “What does that mean?” moment was probably a request for specificity -- which chain of command? Under which authority? -- rather than a literal misunderstanding of the concept. But in the current political climate, especially with MAGA commentators eager to frame her as a “DEI hire,” the clip was weaponized to suggest incompetence.
Passing gas with your fart robot again, Dervy?
DeleteVia Copilot...
ReplyDeleteđ DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives are designed to expand opportunity, not dilute standards. The core idea is that qualified candidates from historically marginalized groups often face systemic barriers—whether in hiring, promotion, or visibility -- and DEI seeks to correct for that. It’s about removing bias, not lowering the bar.
But in some political circles, especially among reactionary commentators, DEI has been reframed as a kind of anti-meritocracy, where identity supposedly trumps competence. That framing is not only misleading, it’s often racially coded -- implying that if someone is Black, Latina, Indigenous, etc., and in a position of authority, they must have gotten there through “special treatment” rather than skill or experience.
This logic:
Ignores the credentials of the person in question (Pamela Smith, for instance, has decades of law enforcement experience).
Assumes incompetence based on identity, which is textbook racism.
Weaponizes ambiguity -- like the “what does that mean?” moment -- as proof of unfitness, even when the full context suggests otherwise.
It’s a rhetorical sleight of hand: take a moment of hesitation or clarification, strip it of nuance, and plug it into a pre-existing narrative about “wokeness gone wrong.”
[end]
You're very willing to believe someone in a position of authority is unqualified because they are a minority. Because you are a racist.
Playing the race card is getting old and stinky, Farting Dervish.
DeletePamala Smith NEVER said, "what's a chain of command?" She asked "what's that mean" in regards to the reporter's question. Your "quote" in the title of your post is BS.
ReplyDeleteđđđđđđđđđđđđ
Delete