Old School. Biblically Independent.
By Dustin Rowles | News | September 11, 2025
Yesterday, soon after the shooting death of Charlie Kirk — a manhunt is still underway — MSNBC’s Katy Tur asked the network’s senior political reporter, Matthew Dowd, about “the environment in which a shooting like this happens.” There isn’t much leeway in that question. We all know the environment we live in, the same one responsible for January 6; for the shooting deaths of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, John; for the attempted assassination of Trump; the violent assault of Paul Pelosi; the shooting attack at the CDC; and the near-daily mass shootings at schools, churches, synagogues, and campuses.
Dowd answered truthfully, saying of Charlie Kirk:
“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. 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. And that’s the unfortunate environment we are in.”
Dowd did not celebrate the shooting. He did not endorse political violence. He spoke honestly about Kirk’s divisiveness — a man who often used dehumanizing rhetoric against racial minorities, LGBTQ+ people, and immigrants.
For that, MSNBC fired him. Not because he was wrong, but because the network calculated that even an accurate description could be spun by the right into “condoning violence.” It was a corporate risk decision, not a journalistic one.
Charlie Kirk should not have been shot. No one should be shot, and stricter gun control laws would mean fewer shooting deaths. But Dowd should not have been fired for accurately describing the environment that produces such shootings. His remarks didn’t cross the line — they revealed the line itself, and how networks now prioritize liability and optics over truth. We live in an environment where factual statements that don’t align with the administration — or that rattle advertisers — can get someone fired, a network sued, or a green card holder deported.
Cable news is dying because its institutions would rather muzzle truth than stand behind the people hired to speak it.
