The Worst Genocidal Tweet of the Year, Brought to You by This Former Breitbart Contributor


On Wednesday, a gunman went on a rampage at Fort Hood, Texas—the site of a mass shooting in November 2009—killing three people and injuring at least 16 others before taking his own life. The soldier was being treated for depression and anxiety. His motive remains unclear, and the Fort Hood commanding general told reporters that “there is no indication that this incident is related to terrorism.”

When awful things happen, people sometimes express themselves on Twitter. Here’s how conservative filmmaker Patrick Dollard, who on Twitter identifies himself as a “contributing journalist” at Breitbart, chose to respond to the news:

Pat Dollard tweet

@patdollard/Twitter

Following this genocidal tweet, Dollard also wrote, “Yeah, Obama’s ‘heartbroken‘ over Ft. Hood because it wasn’t Muslim terrorism.”

Dollard is a former Hollywood agent who has since embedded with US Marines in Iraq and become an aggressive right-wing presence online. “In 2004, having made his name as Steven Soderbergh’s agent, Pat Dollard was the stereotypical Hollywood operator: coked-up, Armani-sheathed, separated from his fourth wife, and rapidly self-destructing,” according to a 2007 Vanity Fair profile.

We asked the editor of Breitbart, Alex Marlow, and the site’s publisher, Stephen Bannon, for a comment on Dollard’s slaughter-Muslims tweet. Within minutes, Kurt Bardella, a spokesman for Breitbart News, called and said, Dollard “was not a paid contributor and has not contributed for three years. He should not call himself a contributor.” Asked if Breitbart would consider publishing future articles submitted by Dollard, Bardella replied, “We have no plans to accept anything. We haven’t ruled anything out. But he is not a Breitbart contributor.”

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate