Former President Obama says the nation is at an “inflection point” after the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. In his first public remarks on the shooting, Obama called Kirk’s death a tragedy.  

“Regardless of where you are on the political spectrum,” he said, “what happened to Charlie Kirk was horrific and tragic.”  

Obama made his remarks at the Jefferson Educational Society’s Global Summit Tuesday night. He argued that America is in the middle of a “political crisis,” but he went further, noting that President Trump is fueling divisions with his response to the tragedy. What stood out most to me was the contrast Obama drew between how presidents respond in moments of national pain.  

He pointed back to former rivals like George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney — people who, despite sharp policy differences, understood the assignment when tragedy struck: unify the country. That reminded me of how Obama himself handled one of the darkest moments of his presidency: the 2015 mass shooting at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, S.C.  

Let’s remember: that was a white supremacist who murdered nine Black worshippers in their sanctuary, hoping to ignite a race war. Obama didn’t scapegoat political enemies or look for the loudest partisan villain to attack. He called the shooter what he was — a criminal — and then tried to rally the nation toward unity.  

“This is not the first time that black churches have been attacked, and we know that hatred across races and faiths pose a particular threat to our democracy and our ideals. The good news is that I am confident that the outpouring of unity, strength, fellowship and love across Charleston today from all races, from all faiths, from all places of worship indicates the degree to which those old vestiges of hatred can be overcome.”  

That’s presidential leadership — setting a tone that calms the country instead of pouring gasoline on an already burning fire. But compare that to how Donald Trump responded to Kirk’s assassination:  

“It’s long past time for all Americans in the media to confront the fact that violence and murder are the tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree day after day year after year in the most despicable way possible. For years those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals.”  

Trump played the blame game two minutes into a four-minute speech. He took the tragedy and used it as a political tool, targeting his opponents rather than simply mourning the loss. Obama, this week, called Trump out. 

“I’ve noticed there has been some confusion around this lately, frankly coming from the White House and some of the other positions of authority that suggest that even before we had determined who the perpetrator of this evil act was that somehow were going to identify an enemy, were gonna suggest that somehow that enemy was at fault and we are then going to use that as a rationale for trying to silence the discussion on who we are as a country and what direction we should go.”  

And that’s the bigger point here. Leadership isn’t about silencing debate or vilifying half the country because they hold different views. It’s about making space for disagreement without justifying violence. Not one democratic leader on the left wished for Charlie Kirk to die because of his views. Not one. Disagreement with someone’s ideology is not the same as endorsing their murder — and suggesting otherwise is not only dishonest, it’s dangerous.  

At the end of the day, presidents set the tone. When tragedy strikes, the job is simple but hard: comfort the nation, call for unity, and make sure the civil discourse continues. Because blaming political rivals for the act of one violent criminal doesn’t just miss the mark — it leaves the country even more divided. That’s not leadership. 

Lindsey Granger is a News Nation contributor and co-host of The Hill’s commentary show “Rising.” This column is an edited transcription of her on-air commentary.