In the aftermath of the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk, MSNBC has terminated political analyst Matthew Dowd following remarks he made that suggested Kirk’s own rhetoric played a role in creating a violent environment. The decision comes amid widespread backlash over Dowd’s comments, which many considered insensitive and inappropriate.
According to People, Variety, The Daily Beast, and multiple media outlets citing internal network sources, Dowd was removed from his role at MSNBC “later Wednesday night” after his on-air statements stirred anger among viewers and political commentators. Variety Australia+3People.com+3The Daily Beast+3
Dowd’s controversial remarks occurred during breaking coverage of Charlie Kirk’s shooting at Utah Valley University on September 10, 2025. Kirk, a conservative political commentator and founder of Turning Point USA, died after being shot while speaking at a campus event known as part of his “American Comeback Tour.”
During an appearance on MSNBC Live with Katy Tur, Dowd was asked by Tur to reflect on “the environment in which a shooting like this happens.” He replied: “He’s been one of the most divisive, especially divisive younger figures in this, who is constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech or sort of aimed at certain groups. And I always go back to, hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions. And I think that is the environment we are in.” He added: “You can’t stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have, and then saying these awful words, and not expect awful actions to take place… that’s the unfortunate environment we are in.” People.com+2Variety Australia+2
Some of his remarks went further, speculating aloud that the shooter might have been “a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration.” While Dowd acknowledged that details were uncertain, that comment elevated concerns among critics who felt he was unfairly placing blame on Kirk himself.
The response was swift. MSNBC President Rebecca Kutler issued a statement condemning Dowd’s words, calling them “inappropriate, insensitive, and unacceptable.” She emphasized that “there is no place for violence in America, political or otherwise.”
Dowd himself later issued an apology via social media. In a post on BlueSky, he stated: “My thoughts & prayers are w/ the family and friends of Charlie Kirk. On an earlier appearance on MSNBC I was asked a question on the environment we are in. I apologize for my tone and words. Let me be clear, I in no way intended for my comments to blame Kirk for this horrendous attack. Let us all come together and condemn violence of any kind.”
Despite the apology, MSNBC opted to part ways with Dowd. Multiple outlets, including Variety and The Wall Street Journal, reported that he is “no longer with the network,” confirming his dismissal.
Reactions across the political spectrum were intense. Some defended Dowd’s broader point about political rhetoric and its possible consequences, while others condemned him for what they saw as a suggestion that Kirk bore some responsibility for his own assassination. Critics argued that the lines Dowd drew were dangerously close to victim-blaming. Supporters of free speech called for nuance, saying that discussion of rhetoric must not excuse acts of violence. Conservative figures demanded consequences; liberal commentators emphasized the sensitivity required when discussing a political assassination.
Authorities have confirmed that the investigation into Kirk’s killing is ongoing. A person of interest was briefly detained and later released; law enforcement continues to gather evidence.
Though the comments sparked the controversy, many observers noted that the broader issue — how political speech, polarization, and rhetoric intersect with cultural and societal tensions — remains a topic of importance. Dowd’s firing underscores the risk media figures face when they attempt to analyze or speculate on political violence in real time, especially amid unsettled facts and widespread public emotion.
In the end, MSNBC’s decision appears driven by both internal judgments about propriety and external pressure. The network’s leadership concluded that Dowd’s remarks crossed a threshold of acceptability for on-air commentary during a national tragedy.
For many viewers, the episode has sparked broader debate: how should media analysts address the roots of political violence without appearing to place undue blame on victims, or stoking division rather than healing it? And what boundaries should networks enforce in moments of crisis?
Charlie Kirk is survived by his wife, Erika Frantzve, and their two young children. As the nation mourns, calls for unity, accountability, and nonviolence resound. Dowd’s termination marks one development in a still-unfolding story of loss, reflection, and controversy.
