Well, there it is. The body of a conservative activist is still warm, the nation’s in shock, and somehow—somehow—Elizabeth Warren and J.B. Pritzker have managed to make his assassination about January 6th. You almost have to admire the audacity.

Charlie Kirk, gunned down in a public forum during a Q&A at Utah Valley University—a throat shot in front of a live audience—and the Left’s knee-jerk response? Not grief. Not unity. Not even the usual “thoughts and prayers” (which they mock anyway). No, their reflexive instinct is to pivot to Trump memes and helicopter references. Really?

Let’s pause here. A conservative voice was assassinated. On stage. In America. That should trigger some bipartisan horror. A moment of silence, at the very least. But instead, we get a bizarre soliloquy from Warren about Trump’s posts—yes, his social media posts—as if those somehow pulled the trigger. And right on cue, Pritzker jumps in to wag the finger at “the president’s rhetoric,” just to ensure that the corpse of Charlie Kirk doesn’t get in the way of their narrative. This isn’t Politics. This is ritual deflection.

Here’s the kicker: they’re blaming the victim. MSNBC couldn’t wait to brand Kirk a “divisive” figure while he was still fighting for his life in the ICU. And Matthew Dowd—always ready to intellectualize away violence—called Kirk’s rhetoric “hate speech” and implied he practically had it coming. That’s right. If you’re right-of-center, outspoken, and have the gall to speak on a college campus, apparently you’re “asking for it.”

But don’t you dare suggest the Left’s climate of intolerance might’ve played a role. Oh no, that’s off-limits. Because the second you point a finger back, they scream January 6th like it’s a magic spell to ward off all responsibility. Doesn’t matter that the shooter was arrested, doesn’t matter that a conservative was killed for his views—what really matters, according to Warren, is some Trump meme showing a burning city. Talk about smoke and mirrors.

Let’s be crystal clear. If a left-wing figure had been shot mid-sentence on a college stage, the national outcry would be deafening. There’d be candlelight vigils, 24/7 wall-to-wall media coverage, and calls for sweeping legislation before the body was cold. But when it’s someone on the right? Suddenly, it’s “well, he was controversial,” and “maybe his speech incited it.”

And don’t even think about asking whether the killer was politically motivated—because the Left really doesn’t want you to follow that trail. No profiles, no ideological deep-dives, no Twitter history examinations. It’s almost like… they don’t want to know. Or worse, they already do.

Advertisement

The emotional gymnastics here are something else. An assassination becomes a narrative opportunity. A man’s death becomes a referendum on Trump’s internet posts. They skip past the shooter. Skip past the motive. And land—predictably—on the boogeyman they’ve been trying to indict for years.

Why? Because acknowledging that political violence can come from the Left would destroy their entire fragile moral high ground. It would mean reckoning with the fact that incendiary rhetoric isn’t confined to one party. That maybe, just maybe, there’s a dangerous intolerance brewing on both sides—but only one side gets called “hate speech” when they speak.

So here we are. The body count rises, but the narrative stays the same. Warren and Pritzker grab their usual scripts, invoke January 6th like it’s a biblical prophecy, and somehow convince their followers that a murdered conservative is still somehow Trump’s fault. It’s insulting. And frankly, it’s getting old.

But hey, keep watching those memes. You never know when a joke post might get blamed for the next real-life tragedy—just as long as it’s someone on the Right taking the bullet.

*This is a developing situation, and information will be updated as more information becomes available.*

The post Senator Comments On Charlie Kirk’s Murder appeared first on Red Right Patriot.