In a powerful memorial for Charlie Kirk, who was tragically murdered in Utah, Tulsi Gabbard condemned the far-left media’s response to the incident. Gabbard, a former director of national intelligence, sharply criticized outlets like MSNBC for their unsettling remarks surrounding Kirk’s death. Her comments come in the wake of a disturbing trend observed across some leftist media personalities, many of whom have either mocked Kirk or justified his violent death.
For instance, one MSNBC personality, Matthew Dowd, infamously stated that Kirk effectively deserved his fate, suggesting, “You can’t stop with these awful thoughts you have and then saying these awful words and then not expect awful actions to take place.” Such comments highlight a grim mentality that seeks to divert responsibility while dismissing the seriousness of the violence.
In her tribute, Gabbard emphasized Kirk’s distinct courage and character. She stated, “Charlie Kirk was truly one of a kind. A kind, loving, and courageous soul who lived what he preached.” She acknowledged Kirk’s unwavering commitment to open and respectful debate regarding political, social, and spiritual differences. This conviction aligns with the foundational principles upon which America was built.
Gabbard went further by labeling the murder a terrorist act. She argued that the shooter aimed to silence Kirk and intimidate those who share his views. “The person who shot Charlie Kirk sought to silence him,” she declared, defining such actions as an unlawful use of violence to threaten freedom of speech. This characterization forces a crucial conversation about the boundaries of political discourse in an increasingly polarized climate.
Moreover, Gabbard offered a compelling analogy, drawing parallels between the radical left’s tactics and those employed by extremist groups like al-Qaeda. She asserted, “The one thing they have in common is that they are so afraid that their arguments, views, and policies will not stand when challenged in free and open debate.” Such comparisons underscore a fear confronting many who challenge dominant narratives, suggesting that dissenting voices face threats not only from individuals but from broader ideological movements.
In reflecting on Kirk’s contributions, Gabbard highlighted his commitment to freedom and his disdain for attempts to silence anyone opposing the so-called liberal establishment. She labeled the assassination an act designed not just to extinguish Kirk’s light but to instill fear in others who dare to speak out. “Charlie Kirk stood up to such fanatics who hate freedom,” she emphasized.
Gabbard did not hold back on her criticism of the media’s reaction, stating, “I was sickened, but not surprised, when I saw the propaganda media like MSNBC react by encouraging and justifying this evil.” This comment reinforces a narrative of disillusionment with how mainstream media handles sensitive political issues—especially when they intersect with violence.
In tying the media’s comments back to the aftermath of 9/11, Gabbard noted that just as terrorists have historically tried to rationalize their violent actions, some in today’s media perpetuate similar justifications. “What they’re really telling us is: shut up, be quiet, or face the consequences,” she warned, indicating a chilling parallel between rhetoric and radical behavior.
As she concluded her tribute, Gabbard reflected on the personal loss faced by Kirk’s family and friends, expressing her heartfelt sorrow: “I’m devastated that Erika lost her husband today, their children lost their father, and so many of us lost a dear friend.” She called Kirk a champion of freedom whose legacy should inspire continued advocacy for constitutional rights. “We must honor his life’s work,” she urged, framing it as a moral imperative to lift voices against oppression.
Tulsi Gabbard’s memorial serves not only as a remembrance of Charlie Kirk but also as a critique of an ever-evolving media landscape that often struggles to navigate complex issues of freedom, violence, and ideological extremism. Her passionate defense of Kirk underscores the urgency for society to engage in civil discourse, reject violence, and uphold the principles of free speech for all.
"*" indicates required fields
