Democratic Consultant Under Fire for Remarks About Charlie Kirk Days Before His Assassination
The shockwaves following the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk have grown deeper as remarks made just days before his death by Democratic political consultant Gabi Finlayson resurface.
Finlayson, who has been linked to Democratic campaigns for President Joe Biden and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, described Kirk’s ongoing campus speaking events as a “campus martyr tour” and dismissed his organization, Turning Point USA, as a “content farm for white supremacy.”
The remarks were made during a livestreamed political commentary session and have since circulated widely online. In the clip, Finlayson criticizes Kirk’s American Comeback Tour, which began at Utah Valley University (UVU) on September 10th and was scheduled to return to Utah later in the month at Utah State University.
The Remarks
“Today’s fresh hell is that Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, is bringing his so-called American Comeback Tour to two campuses near you. Boo!” Finlayson said, her tone dripping with sarcasm.
She went on:
“He is starting his tour at UVU on September 10th, and then he’ll be back in Utah on the 30th at Utah State. Terrible. Demon boy. Charlie Kirk is one of these campus tour speakers that always sparks controversy, and for a very good reason.”
Finlayson then offered a sharp rebuke of Turning Point USA’s evolution since its founding:
“When he was 18 years old, he founded something called Turning Point USA, which is essentially a network across the country of different college clubs that are focused on spreading the good word of the far right. So when he founded this, it was supposed to be a non-partisan debate platform where we would get people together in good faith and have discussions about things. And now, in 2025, it is certainly not that. Since its founding, it abandoned this non-partisan debate journey that it was on, and is now a content farm for white supremacy, cancel culture martyrdom, conspiracy theorists, and all too often, these mega conventions where little baby fascists get to cosplay as freedom fighters.”
The “campus martyr tour” phrasing has since been highlighted by Kirk’s supporters as disturbingly prophetic, given that just three days later Kirk was gunned down while speaking at UVU, in what authorities have described as a political assassination.
Who Is Gabi Finlayson?
Finlayson, a rising Democratic strategist, has carved out a niche as a communications consultant for progressive campaigns and advocacy groups. Public records and media archives show her involvement in digital strategy projects linked to Biden for President 2020 and to Pete Buttigieg’s 2020 Democratic primary campaign.
While not a household name, Finlayson has built influence in Democratic circles for her sharp rhetoric, particularly on issues of race, gender, and political extremism. Her critics now accuse her of using that platform irresponsibly by targeting Kirk in language they say dehumanized him and fueled an atmosphere of hostility.
The Assassination
On September 11, 2025, during a campus event at Utah Valley University, Kirk was shot and killed in front of a packed auditorium. The alleged shooter, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, has been charged with capital murder and related offenses.
Investigators have described the crime as politically motivated. Kirk, 31, was a father of two, husband to Erika Kirk, and the founder of Turning Point USA, an organization he launched at age 18 to promote conservative activism among college students.
In the days since, vigils have been held across the U.S., and figures ranging from President Donald Trump to Vice President JD Vance have pledged to carry forward Kirk’s legacy.
Fallout From Finlayson’s Comments
The resurfacing of Finlayson’s remarks has provoked anger among conservatives and even some moderates who say such rhetoric crosses the line of legitimate political critique.
“Calling someone a ‘demon boy’ and mocking their events as a ‘martyr tour’ — just days before the man is literally assassinated — is grotesque,” said Ashley Morales, a conservative student leader at Arizona State University. “Words matter. And when political consultants cheerlead hatred, it creates a climate where violence seems inevitable.”
Others have drawn attention to Finlayson’s professional ties. “This isn’t just some random activist,” noted columnist Richard O’Connell. “This is a consultant with direct links to Biden and Buttigieg campaigns. Democrats need to answer for whether this kind of language reflects their culture of politics.”
Democrats, however, have defended Finlayson’s right to sharp critique, arguing that she cannot be blamed for the actions of an assassin. “This is guilt by association run amok,” said Leah Porter, a progressive strategist. “Gabi made a tough political critique. That doesn’t make her responsible for what a deranged individual did days later.”
The Larger Debate
The controversy has reignited a broader national conversation about political speech, extremism, and responsibility in a polarized climate.
On the right, Finlayson’s words are seen as part of a culture that demonizes conservatives, creating a permissive environment for violence. Many compare her language to Judge Ted Berry of Ohio, who celebrated Kirk’s death as “karma” in a post that has since drawn calls for his removal from the bench.
On the left, defenders argue that strong language against figures like Kirk — who himself was a polarizing speaker often accused of inflaming culture war battles — is part of legitimate democratic debate. They caution against equating words with bullets.
Still, the timing of Finlayson’s remarks makes them difficult to separate from the tragic event that followed. For Kirk’s supporters, the language now feels chillingly predictive, casting his tour as a “martyr” journey — words that became literal when he was assassinated on stage.
Turning Point USA’s Response
Turning Point USA, the organization Kirk founded in 2012, issued a statement condemning Finlayson’s remarks.
“Charlie Kirk dedicated his life to engaging young people in ideas of freedom, faith, and America’s founding values,” the statement read. “For a Democratic consultant to label his work a ‘content farm for white supremacy’ is not only false, but it dishonors the memory of a husband, father, and leader taken too soon.”
The group pledged to continue Kirk’s American Comeback Tour, framing it as both tribute and defiance. “Charlie’s voice will not be silenced,” they wrote.
Looking Ahead
Whether Finlayson faces formal repercussions remains unclear. While she has not issued a statement since Kirk’s assassination, pressure is mounting from conservatives demanding she apologize or step away from political work. Some are even calling for Democrats to disavow her.
For now, the incident underscores how volatile American political discourse has become. Words spoken in jest or as critique can take on haunting resonance when violence follows.
As one commentator put it: “When consultants talk about martyr tours, and days later a man is made into a martyr by assassination, it stops being politics-as-usual. It becomes a question of whether our rhetoric is planting the seeds for tragedy.”
Conclusion
Charlie Kirk’s assassination has already become one of the most consequential political killings in recent American history. The resurfacing of Gabi Finlayson’s remarks days before his death ensures that the debate will not be confined to the gunman alone.
Instead, it now extends to the broader culture of political rhetoric — what is said, how it is said, and whether those entrusted with influence bear responsibility when their words collide with acts of violence.
For many Americans, the question is simple: if those in politics and media cannot draw the line between critique and dehumanization, how can the country hope to prevent the next act of political bloodshed?
