The Government's Story About Alex Pretti Just Fell Apart – And They Know It
Trump administration officials' story about the Alex Pretti shooting is crumbling – and they know it.
When Border Patrol agents shot and killed Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on January 24, the Trump administration immediately launched into damage control mode.
But instead of being honest about what happened, top officials—from DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to FBI Director Kash Patel to White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller— did what every government does best: They told lie after lie to justify killing an American citizen.
Video evidence, witness testimony, and investigative reporting have exposed these lies one by one. And the pattern is clear: these people will say anything to protect federal agents who kill civilians — whether it is true or false.
Let’s take a look at the administration’s falsehoods and then debunk them one-by-one.
Lie #1: Pretti Approached Officers With a Gun
What they said: DHS claimed in an official statement that “an individual approached U.S. Border Patrol officers with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun.” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem doubled down, saying Pretti was “brandishing” a weapon.
What actually happened: Multiple videos show Pretti holding a cellphone, not a firearm. Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara directly contradicted Noem: “I don’t have evidence that I’ve seen suggests that the weapon was brandished.”
Video footage proved that an agent removed Pretti’s gun from his waistband during the struggle—meaning Pretti never had it in his hands. They shot him shortly after removing the gun.
By the way, Pretti had a permit to carry a concealed firearm.
When pressed on Sunday morning TV, administration officials suddenly got cautious about defending this claim. Funny how that works when video evidence contradicts your narrative.
Lie #2: Pretti Violently Resisted When Agents Tried to Disarm Him
What they said: The DHS statement claimed the “armed suspect violently resisted” when officers attempted to disarm him.
What actually happened: A witness who saw the shooting gave a sworn statement: “It didn’t look like he was trying to resist, just trying to help the woman up.”
Video footage shows Pretti intervened to help a woman who had been shoved down to the ground and pepper-sprayed by a federal agent. Pretti can be seen jumping in front of an officer with his hand up, trying to stop him from harming the lady.
That’s when agents swarmed him, deployed more pepper spray, and tackled him to the ground. Helping someone who’s being assaulted by federal agents isn’t “violent resistance” by any stretch of the imagination.
People can disagree on whether Pretti should have inserted himself between the officer and the woman. But the notion that he “violently’ resisted the officers makes about as much sense as a soup sandwich.
Lie #3: Pretti Intended to Massacre Law Enforcement
What they said: Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino told CNN it “looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.” Noem echoed this, claiming Pretti arrived “to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.”
What actually happened: They provided exactly zero evidence for this absurdity. When CNN’s Dana Bash repeatedly pressed Bovino for proof, he couldn’t offer any.
Because he was lying.
As evidence, these officials and online influencers cited the fact that Pretti carried a firearm and had an extra magazine, which means he had about 30 rounds of ammo.
These officials were counting on the reality that most people don’t know that gun owners typically have an extra magazine in their vehicles.
The pistol I carry holds 16 rounds. I often have an extra magazine in my car, which brings the total to 31 rounds. This is not illegal, nor is it indicative of someone who wants to harm others. It’s simply a precaution that many of us take.
Lie #4: Pretti Was a “Would-Be Assassin” and “Domestic Terrorist”
What they said: Stephen Miller called Pretti an “assassin” who “tried to murder federal agents.” He also labeled him a “domestic terrorist.” Noem described Pretti’s actions as “domestic terrorism.”
What actually happened: There’s no evidence whatsoever that Pretti intended to assassinate anyone. He was a licensed gun owner legally carrying a permitted firearm—which is his constitutional right. Even the typically conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board said “The Administration spin on this simply isn’t believable” and noted that Pretti “was a citizen without a criminal record.”
By Monday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt wouldn’t defend Miller’s inflammatory comments, instead citing the “ongoing investigation.” Translation: They know they got caught lying.
Also, let’s use a bit of common sense here. Pretti was armed up until the point when he was on the ground. If he was an “assassin” or “domestic terrorist,” why did he never even draw his gun? Seems to me there was plenty of opportunity to kill Border Patrol agents — yet he didn’t.
Lie #5: Carrying a Firearm to a Protest Is Illegal
What they said: FBI Director Kash Patel stated on Fox News: “You cannot bring a firearm that’s loaded with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you like.”
<blockquote class=”twitter-tweet” data-media-max-width=”560”><p lang=”en” dir=”ltr”>Kash Patel today: "You cannot bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want."<br><br>Kash Patel in 2021: "This is what Fight with Kash is for. We will help Kyle Rittenhouse." <a href=”
What actually happened: This is flat-out false. Pretti had a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm in Minnesota, which is legal at protests. Gun rights groups immediately slammed Patel and Noem for “spreading misinformation” about Second Amendment rights.
Let me tell you a secret. While covering the George Floyd protests in Austin, Texas, I carried a firearm. Texas is a permitless carry state, so I didn’t need a license (although I still had one). Was I breaking the law?
Just in case, please don’t share this article with Kash Patel.
When the director of the FBI doesn’t understand basic gun laws—or worse, intentionally misrepresents them—we have a serious problem. Lawfully carrying a firearm is not a death sentence. It’s a constitutionally protected right.
Lie #6: Democrats “Incited” the Protests
What they said: Trump posted that Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey were “inciting Insurrection” with their “pompous, dangerous, and arrogant rhetoric.”
What actually happened: Neither Walz nor Frey encouraged violence. Mayor Frey asked at a press conference: “How many more residents, how many more Americans need to die or get badly hurt for this operation to end?” That’s not incitement—that’s accountability.
Now, I won’t pretend that both Walz and Frey didn’t contribute to the vitriol we have seen during the debate over immigration. They certainly did. But blaming them for this shooting is like blaming Trump for Jan. 6.
Here’s what really happened: protests intensified after federal agents killed two Americans in less than three weeks. As it turns out, most people don’t like the idea of law enforcement officers unjustly killing people. So, it makes sense that people would protest.
The Pattern: Federal Agents Lie, Then Cover Their Tracks
This isn’t just about one shooting. It’s about a pattern of federal overreach, deception, and obstruction. A Trump-appointed judge had to issue an emergency restraining order Saturday night to stop the Trump administration from “destroying or altering evidence” related to Pretti’s killing.
Minnesota officials reported that federal agents rapidly removed evidence from the crime scene and denied state investigators access—even after they got a search warrant.
When a federal judge has to step in to prevent evidence destruction, that tells you everything you need to know about the government’s commitment to transparency and accountability.
And let’s not forget: Gregory Bovino—the Border Patrol commander making claims about Pretti’s intent—has a documented history of lying. In November 2025, a federal judge found that Bovino “admitted that he lied” under oath about immigration enforcement operations in Chicago. The judge called him “not credible” and said he was “outright lying” during his deposition.
This means that when Bovino makes a statement, we should all take it with a giant vat of salt.
This Is What Government Overreach Looks Like
This is what happens when federal agencies operate with near-total impunity. They kill first, lie about it later, and obstruct investigations into their own conduct. Whether it’s a Republican or Democrat in the White House, this pattern of federal overreach and deception should alarm anyone who values liberty and limited government.
The question is: Are we going to keep accepting these lies, or are we finally going to demand accountability for federal agents who kill civilians?
Not MAGA, but I have some questions:
If you lived in a sanctuary city, would you disrupt these operations by ICE by trying to take over the authority on scene and sounding horns and whistles?