White House shifts rhetoric on Minneapolis shooting amid fierce backlash

MINNEAPOLIS — The Trump administration pivoted its messaging Saturday after federal agents shot and killed a 37-year-old man, an incident that has drawn intense scrutiny after viral videos appeared to contradict the government’s initial account.

Senior officials originally labeled Alex Pretti, 37, a “domestic terrorist” and a “potential assassin” following the Saturday morning shooting. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claimed Pretti intended to “cause harm” and was “brandishing a weapon.”

However, the White House shifted its tone as footage of the encounter began circulating online. The videos show Pretti was unarmed while being restrained by agents, and local police later confirmed he was a legal gun owner.

Facing mounting bipartisan criticism, the White House moved to blame the incident on “Democrat-run chaos.” President Trump called Pretti’s death “tragic” and dispatched “Border Czar” Tom Homan to Minneapolis to lead local law enforcement efforts.

The shooting has intensified Democratic opposition to the president’s mass deportation policies. The escalating political tension comes as the government faces a potential shutdown deadline this Friday.

The Minneapolis shooting represents more than a localized tragedy; it serves as a high-stakes political stress test for the Trump administration’s established “deny and attack” playbook. In this instance, that strategy has faltered in the face of indisputable video evidence and a sharp public backlash. The rapid pivot from castigating the victim as a security threat to offering condolences—while redirecting blame toward political opponents—marks a rare tactical recalibration by the White House.

The deployment of Tom Homan to the scene is a calculated move to reclaim the narrative. While Homan is a known hardliner, he possesses a level of political acumen that suggests his presence is aimed more at optics than a substantive shift in policy. This maneuver appears designed to mollify both an outraged public and a growing contingent of uneasy Republicans. Indeed, the emergence of rare public dissent from GOP governors and senators underscores a widening intra-party rift over the administration’s aggressive federal enforcement tactics.

For Democrats, the incident has provided significant political leverage, elevating a local flashpoint into a national referendum on immigration policy that could potentially precipitate a government shutdown. As recent polling indicates a steady erosion of public support for ICE’s operational tactics, this incident threatens to accelerate that trend, transforming a cornerstone of the President’s domestic agenda into an escalating political liability.

The aggressive tactics employed by ICE, recently highlighted by a shooting in Minneapolis, have sparked deep-seated concern across the Vietnamese community. While the incident did not directly involve a person of Vietnamese descent, the broader push for mass deportations and federal enforcement has created an atmosphere of fear for many immigrant families. In Little Saigons nationwide, from the nail salon industry to local phở restaurants, there is a palpable sense of unease—particularly for those with relatives in precarious legal standing or with old criminal records. These events serve as a stark reminder of the potential for high-stakes confrontations with federal authorities, leaving many who are navigating the complexities of the immigration system, from F2B petitions to status adjustments, feeling increasingly vulnerable.