By Don Terry | Saturday, September 13, 2025 | 7 min read

MSNBC’s decision to cut ties with political analyst Matthew Dowd over his comments about Charlie Kirk wasn’t just misguided — it was cowardly. In a moment when the country desperately needs media to stand firm against toxic political rhetoric, Comcast and MSNBC chose the easy way out: silence the critic, protect the brand, and hope the controversy fades.

Here’s what actually happened. Moments after the tragic shooting at Utah Valley University, anchor Katy Tur asked Dowd about “the environment in which a shooting like this happens.” Dowd didn’t speculate about the shooter’s motives or pin the crime directly on Charlie Kirk. Instead, he spoke about the broader atmosphere of division in American politics — and pointed to Kirk as one of the younger figures who has made a career out of stoking it.

“He’s been one of the most divisive… constantly pushing hate speech aimed at certain groups,” Dowd explained. “Hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions. And that is the environment we are in.”

For that, MSNBC showed him the door.

The network’s parent company, Comcast, quickly labeled his comments “unacceptable and insensitive.” Let’s call that what it really is: corporate speak for “we don’t want the hassle.”

Meanwhile, the reaction on the right was swift and brutal. Prominent activist Laura Loomer openly called on the Trump administration to “shut down, defund, and prosecute every single Leftist organization.” Donald Trump himself piled on, pointing fingers at “the media” and the “radical left.”

When CNN later pressed Senator Elizabeth Warren on whether Democrats should “lower the temperature,” she dismissed the suggestion outright. “Oh, please,” she shot back. “Why don’t you start with the president of the United States? With every ugly meme he’s posted and every ugly word he’s uttered?”

Elizabeth Warren Response — Senator Elizabeth Warren on whether Democrats should “lower the temperature

Amid the political firestorm, Erika Kirk — appearing publicly for the first time since her husband’s killing at Utah Valley University — addressed supporters on Turning Point USA’s YouTube page, the movement her husband founded as a teenager and grew into a campus powerhouse. “The evil-doers responsible for my husband’s assassination have no idea what they’ve done,” she said, her voice breaking.

But here’s the uncomfortable reality: those words ring hollow without some acknowledgment of her husband’s own role in shaping the climate that made him such a lightning rod. For years, Charlie Kirk used his platform not to bridge divides but to deepen them, framing politics as a zero-sum war and painting opponents as enemies of the nation. He encouraged outrage, glorified confrontation, and repeatedly leaned on the very rhetoric that Dowd described as hateful.

Yes, Erika Kirk is grieving — and no one should diminish her loss. But it is also impossible to ignore the hypocrisy of mourning the consequences of a political culture that her husband helped fuel, while refusing to confront his own legacy in fostering it. Her words might have carried more moral authority had she spoken them while he was alive, urging him to temper the vitriol he pumped into America’s bloodstream. Instead, she now frames his death as a tragedy inflicted solely from the outside, when in truth, his divisive tone was part of the firestorm that consumed him.

Even Elon Musk joined the chorus of right-wing figures accusing the left of killing Charlie Kirk. Isolating Dowd as a villain for being truthful is repulsive.

Compare that with how Republicans respond in similar moments. After tragedies, they rarely hesitate to point fingers. Democrats are accused of being “soft on crime,” of undermining police, of enabling chaos. Those accusations often fly before victims’ families have even been notified. Yet conservative commentators rarely face professional consequences for their words. Dowd, on the other hand, dared to connect the dots between divisive rhetoric and violent outcomes — and was punished for it.

MSNBC Silences Dowd to Keep Conservatives Comfortable

The double standard is impossible to ignore. When Republicans sling accusations, it’s brushed off as “just politics.” When someone like Dowd points out an uncomfortable truth about a conservative figure, it’s labeled “unacceptable” and “insensitive.” That isn’t fairness — it’s cowardice. MSNBC caved to pressure and threw him under the bus.

And here’s the irony: while Dowd was punished for simply describing the toxic culture Charlie Kirk has fueled, Republicans and Trump were busy pushing outright misinformation. They rushed to brand the shooter as a leftist, hoping to weaponize the tragedy for political gain. But the facts don’t back that up.

A neighbor who knew the Robinson family told CBS News she hadn’t seen him in years, but remembered his parents as supportive of the country — and of President Trump. State records, however, show Robinson himself was registered as unaffiliated. He hadn’t voted in the last two elections and wasn’t even old enough to cast a ballot in 2020. In other words, he was not a Democrat.

That single detail exposes just how far the right is willing to go to twist reality. Dowd wasn’t inventing a partisan fantasy; he was stating a truth that experts, law enforcement, and historians have long recognized — hateful words breed hateful actions. MSNBC punished him for it, while giving cover to those who deliberately spread lies.

MSNBC could have handled this moment differently. They could have stood by Dowd, clarifying that his comments were analysis, not personal blame. They could have aired a follow-up discussion about rhetoric and violence, inviting different perspectives. MSNBC could have used the controversy to spark a necessary national debate. Instead, they threw Dowd under the bus — and in doing so, signaled that tough truths about influential conservative figures are off-limits.

That decision doesn’t just hurt Dowd. It weakens the network’s credibility. If analysts have to self-censor to avoid offending political figures, then MSNBC becomes just another outlet chasing ratings instead of serving the public. That is exactly the kind of avoidance Dowd was warning about — an environment where we look away from the uncomfortable realities shaping our politics.

History has shown us that uncomfortable truths don’t stay hidden. Donald Trump’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein was once brushed aside as gossip; today it’s an indelible part of his public record. Likewise, the role of figures like Charlie Kirk in promoting a culture of division and hostility will eventually be impossible to ignore. Dowd simply had the courage to say it out loud, and MSNBC punished him for it.

Matthew Dowd was right. MSNBC was wrong. And if the media keeps punishing truth-tellers while protecting provocateurs, then we will only see more of the “hateful thoughts, hateful words, and hateful actions” that Dowd tried to warn us about.e protecting provocateurs, then we will only see more of the “hateful thoughts, hateful words, and hateful actions” that Dowd tried to warn us about.

Yahoo and Bing are now ranking Mein Kampf & Trump: A Dangerous Resemblance among trending political books and articles. What’s fueling the attention? Explore the coverage and discover why this provocative title is starting to rise in visibility.