MN - Alex Pretti dead after Minneapolis shooting involving immigration agents, US media report, January 24, 2026

[waldojabba]

Senator Rand Paul, R-Ky., called for an independent investigation into Pretti's death, saying the Department of Homeland Security should appoint a commission.

"We can’t just say oh, nothing to see here, and he was obviously an assassin and a domestic terrorist. When we say things like that, it leads to no confidence," he said, referring to DHS's initial statements about Pretti.

"I don’t think it’s honest to say he brandished a weapon. I don’t think it’s honest to say he assaulted officers," he told reporters. "I’m not saying he might not have been obnoxious. I’m not saying he might have said obnoxious things, but he films; he doesn’t even obstruct the traffic. He waves a car through in the middle of this as they approach him. He retreats as they approach him again, he retreats when a woman is shoved to the ground, he goes to help her up, and that’s when he is grabbed from behind."
Minneapolis live updates: Two Border Patrol agents who fired their guns in Alex Pretti’s fatal shooting have been put on leave

thank you Senator Paul.

Omg even Rand Paul gets it right….baby steps !
Jmo

 

[JennieM]

Do you have a link to the BBC video?

I posted it upthread, I’ll find it for you.

ETA:

Post in thread 'MN - Alex Pretti dead after Minneapolis shooting involving immigration agents, US media report, January 24, 2026'
MN - Alex Pretti dead after Minneapolis shooting involving immigration agents, US media report, January 24, 2026

 

[Greenestdays]

Hey Everyone,

A friend of mine shared his thoughts with me and gave me permission to post them here. His perspective is different from what most people in this thread believe

I’m posting this because I think it’s important to understand how people think who strongly disagree with each other. I’d like to hear your responses to his views and how you would address his arguments.

As always, please respond respectfully and thoughtfully. This is a good opportunity to show that people can disagree passionately and still have a productive, civil conversation.

From my friend
I think that any LE officer in this situation could have felt threatened by this guy's movements. He is clearly resisting the officers and reaching for something. Did someone shout "gun" at some point? If so it would heighten the fear among the officers. Did the officers who fired at him know that another officer had taken a weapon from him? I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't from watching that confusing struggle. Does taking a single weapon during the struggle mean he doesn't have another weapon that could be used to kill? Of course not

So it's boils down to did the actions of the armed instigator cause these officers to fear for their lives or the safety of others. If it did then the shooting is legally justified

I wonder if you think it's possible the officers in this case really did fear for their safety during this encounter with the armed protester.

Tricia again. I would love to see your replies to my friend's message.

I would kindly ask your friend to actually watch the videos and then come back to me when they can point out where Alex was “clearly resisting”, “reaching for something” (sure, he was reaching to help up the lady the ICE agent had just shoved to the ground). Nothing in the officers’ behaviour or actions was showing fear, they were being confrontational, pushy, and eventually two of them killed a person, some scattered, one clapped, a few started going through the victim’s pockets. That is not fear, that is evil.

 

[PrairieWind]

Well, I can understand how you would see this.
I would suggest that this massive support is, in part, due to the absolute hypocricy.

Many today supporting the amendment, a few years ago were calling it obsolete and needing to be done away with. This is why we have a Constitution, to stand up to the changes in feelings and political winds of change.

 

[nhmemorymaker]

I would first ask my friend to show me where AP is "clearly resisting the officer and reaching for something" in one of the many angles of video that captured the moments just prior to and the shooting. Was it when he was stumbling as he was being forcefully shoved backwards? Was it when his face was full of pepper spray as he tried to ward some of that off with his raised open left hand and a cell phone is his right? Was it when he was bending to try to pull the woman next to him off the ground where she had just been shoved hard by an agent?

Because I have seen a number of second by second breakdowns that do not show him clearly resisting anything, except being shoved and being pepper sprayed. Next I would show my friend the video clip that illustrates one agent removing the weapon from AP's person and leaving the vicinity with it as other officers yelled "gun" "gun" and seconds later agents firing at a man who was on his knees and then his stomach while surrounded by six armed agents who were kicking and hitting him.

I would then ask my friend to explain why he thought the additional shots fired into the prone and probably already dead man's body might also be driven by fear. I would ask my friend if he thought perhaps their training should have covered communicating effectively with one another so that misunderstandings about whether there was a gun on AP's person or not would not occur. Finally I would ask my friend what in the agent clapping gleefully after the 10 shots had been fired into AP seemed to indicate he was ever fearful of an alleged hostile "crowd" of agitators?

I think I would start there.

Good start.

 

[SouthAussie]

It’s reasonable to believe that the agents didn’t know that a firearm was in possession. I think Tricia’s friend makes a good point about the possibility of a second weapon, something I hadn’t thought about. I’m sure they’re trained for that.

That’s far more plausible than believing multiple agents deliberately set out to kill a protester for helping a woman. imo

I don't think anyone is saying that they deliberately set out to kill an observer.

They deliberately roughed an observer up by pushing her down, they deliberately pulled away another observer who was trying to help her up, while they were piled on him someone said "gun" so two of them fired 10 shots between them into Alex.

It is incompetence at its finest, that resulted in the killing of a US citizen.

imo

 

[PrairieWind]

The Bill of Rights is a second document that had to be fought for and the fight was not easy. To say they are one document is not only false, it denies the important history of both documents.

But, yes, the Constititution and all the amendments together form the law of the land.

jmopinion

The amendments are part of the Constitution, correct? They all have a history, but they are part of the constitution. There is no lesser value to them.

 

[nhmemorymaker]

Many today supporting the amendment, a few years ago were calling it obsolete and needing to be done away with. This is why we have a Constitution, to stand up to the changes in feelings and political winds of change.

Well, too far off topic for this thread...to tackle this question.
However, Bill of Rights is not the Constitution. The Bill of Rights were designed to greater limit the Federal powers .

Seriously offering a great great book...to everyone
for what I have thought to be THE best description and details of entire process that our Founding Fathers and all the 13 Colony representation put into the beginnings of this country.
1776, by David McCoulough

 

[JennieM]

Family of Alex Pretti retains lawyer who helped prosecute the George Floyd case​

BY MICHAEL BIESECKER
Updated 9:59 PM GMT, January 28, 2026

The parents of Alex Pretti have retained a former federal prosecutor who helped Minnesota’s attorney general convict the police officer who kneeled on George Floyd’s neck of murder.

[…]

Schleicher is representing Michael and Susan Pretti pro bono, according to a family spokesman.

Pretti’s younger sister, Micayla Pretti, has separately hired attorney Anthony Cotton of Kuchler & Cotton in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Family of Alex Pretti retains lawyer who helped prosecute the George Floyd case

The parents of Alex Pretti have retained a former federal prosecutor who helped Minnesota’s attorney general convict the police officer of murder who kneeled on George Floyd’s neck.

apnews.com

 

[southgoldengirl]

Many today supporting the amendment, a few years ago were calling it obsolete and needing to be done away with. This is why we have a Constitution, to stand up to the changes in feelings and political winds of change.

omg they're not necessarily supporting the amendment, they're supporting equality under the Constitution. How can you not comprehend this? You're an attorney aren't you? Critical thinking in the US is an endangered species.

 

[jepop]

I don't think anyone is saying that they deliberately set out to kill an observer.

They deliberately roughed an observer up by pushing her down, they deliberately pulled away another observer who was trying to help her up, while they were piled on him someone said "gun" so two of them fired 10 shots between them into Alex.

It is incompetence at its finest, that resulted in the killing of a US citizen.

imo

Incompetence is one way of putting it, reckless homicide/X degree murder is another IMO

 

[K9Enzo]

Hey Everyone,

A friend of mine shared his thoughts with me and gave me permission to post them here. His perspective is different from what most people in this thread believe

I’m posting this because I think it’s important to understand how people think who strongly disagree with each other. I’d like to hear your responses to his views and how you would address his arguments.

As always, please respond respectfully and thoughtfully. This is a good opportunity to show that people can disagree passionately and still have a productive, civil conversation.

From my friend
I think that any LE officer in this situation could have felt threatened by this guy's movements. He is clearly resisting the officers and reaching for something. Did someone shout "gun" at some point? If so it would heighten the fear among the officers. Did the officers who fired at him know that another officer had taken a weapon from him? I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't from watching that confusing struggle. Does taking a single weapon during the struggle mean he doesn't have another weapon that could be used to kill? Of course not

So it's boils down to did the actions of the armed instigator cause these officers to fear for their lives or the safety of others. If it did then the shooting is legally justified

I wonder if you think it's possible the officers in this case really did fear for their safety during this encounter with the armed protester.

Tricia again. I would love to see your replies to my friend's message.

Tricia, thank you for this question. I will try not to take it on a hay ride : )

IMO ONLY From LE perspective, these encounters are becoming more dangerous because many misunderstand where the legal lines are. There's widespread belief that as long as no physical contact happens, nothing unlawful is happening. This is getting people injured and killed.

Assault does not require physical contact. What matters is whether someone’s actions create a reasonable fear of imminent harm. When people deliberately close distance, step into an agents path, or force a moment where the agent must stop, or push through, that behavior is no longer passive protest. It is perceived as obstruction and a safety risk to the agent.

Agents aren’t evaluating these moments in slow motion or with the benefit of replay. They are assessing intent, proximity, movement, and threat in real time, often with shouting, bizarre whistles blowing non stop, frozen water bottles being thrown at them, car horns honking nonstop, crowd pressure, and limited visibility. When someone engineers a confrontation through movement, the agent must make a split-second decision based on safety, not speculation about motives.

There is no right to physically obstruct a federal agent performing official duties. To me Mr. Pretti was obstructing. From the agent’s standpoint, being blocked, crowded, or forced into unavoidable contact is a legitimate safety concern, not a political disagreement.

A struggle was clearly underway, someone yelled “gun,” and at least one firearm was involved, which would reasonably heighten fear in a fast-moving, chaotic encounter. From the agents POV it’s possible they did not know whether a weapon had already been secured or whether the person had another weapon. What did the agent(s) reasonably perceive at the time? I suspect we are going to hear this was not one (singular) agent that fired reportedly 10 times, but more than one. I believe this all went down in four seconds. IMO

 

[JennieM]

'We are all on survival mode', one Minneapolis resident says​

Ana Faguy
Reporting from Minneapolis

Mary Anne Quiroz can't stop thinking about an incident that happened in November, before the large ICE presence came to her city, when there were only limited reports of what immigration officials were doing.

She ran to her neighbours' aid as ICE attempted to detain people near a local grocery store.

Quiroz said when she got to the scene she asked officers how she could help and why they were detaining her neighbour.

She and others also told them that if they "really are here wanting to take away criminals, take down criminals, then show us the warrant".

"We'll help you catch them," she said they told the officers. "We will help you do your job, but the issue is, there is a process and a procedure by law that you're not following."

She believes that offer, as well as the large presence of neighbours on the scene, helped dissuade them from following through that day. Now, she is holding her breath as she wonders what actions immigration agents will take next, and what it will mean for Minneapolis.

"We are all on survival mode right now, regardless of race, class, gender, religious affiliation," she told me. " All of our lives are at stake right now."

Live: Agents involved in shooting of Minnesota man Alex Pretti put on leave

Pretti, a US citizen, was shot and killed on Saturday in an incident which has sparked ongoing protests.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[keek]

Moo...yes that was really strange to watch. They are just stuffing stuff in their pockets. Is that allowed? He is obviously dead it is not like he can hide anything.

Thieves, isn't there a law about doing something to a corpse? I just don't remember the words. He was a corpse, they made sure. They were stealing from whom they killed. IMO

 

[tlcya]

Thieves, isn't there a law about doing something to a corpse? I just don't remember the words. He was a corpse, they made sure. They were stealing from whom they killed. IMO

now now I am sure they were just investigating the crime scene. the crime being homicide JMO

 

[statt#1]

Tricia, thank you for this question. I will try not to take it on a hay ride : )

IMO ONLY From LE perspective, these encounters are becoming more dangerous because many misunderstand where the legal lines are. There's widespread belief that as long as no physical contact happens, nothing unlawful is happening. This is getting people injured and killed.

Assault does not require physical contact. What matters is whether someone’s actions create a reasonable fear of imminent harm. When people deliberately close distance, step into an agents path, or force a moment where the agent must stop, or push through, that behavior is no longer passive protest. It is perceived as obstruction and a safety risk to the agent.

Agents aren’t evaluating these moments in slow motion or with the benefit of replay. They are assessing intent, proximity, movement, and threat in real time, often with shouting, bizarre whistles blowing non stop, frozen water bottles being thrown at them, car horns honking nonstop, crowd pressure, and limited visibility. When someone engineers a confrontation through movement, the agent must make a split-second decision based on safety, not speculation about motives.

There is no right to physically obstruct a federal agent performing official duties. To me Mr. Pretti was obstructing. From the agent’s standpoint, being blocked, crowded, or forced into unavoidable contact is a legitimate safety concern, not a political disagreement.

A struggle was clearly underway, someone yelled “gun,” and at least one firearm was involved, which would reasonably heighten fear in a fast-moving, chaotic encounter. From the agents POV it’s possible they did not know whether a weapon had already been secured or whether the person had another weapon. What did the agent(s) reasonably perceive at the time? I suspect we are going to hear this was not one (singular) agent that fired reportedly 10 times, but more than one. I believe this all went down in four seconds. IMO

Correct. Watching videos of the incident is totally different from and impossible to determine the perception(s) of the Federal agents during the tussle.

There was no murder or execution here. MOO

 

[sunshineray]

In my opinion, there’s subtext that is clear to me in POTUS’ statement.

‘You can’t walk in with guns… if you are a member of the opposition party/if you oppose actions of the Trump administration.’

MOO

Exactly right...according to Chief of Staff MM's aide who testified about Jan 6th (paraphrasing), Secret Service was told to take down the metal detectors and let my people gather and march with their guns etc... they're not going to hurt me.

His perspective about guns then couldn't be farther from his perspective now about SP's death in MN.

 

[nhmemorymaker]

Yes the 2nd Amendment is part of the Constitution and is the right of the People as you say. However you don't have to agree with the 2nd Amendment to support that whatever is in the Constitution is for ALL the People not just a select few.

So if the 2nd Amendment was trotted out for Kyle Rittenhouse who drove to another state and inserted himself into a protest and actually killed people with a firearm not licensed to him and was then acquitted, invited to the Whitehouse and held up as a hero, then surely Pretti under the same Amendment with a conceal carry license, who didn't brandish the weapon is entitled to the same rights, without the President et al coming out and saying he shouldn't have been there with a gun.

Apologies for the long sentence I have some things to attend to.

I do believe I have had posts deleted--when bringing up Kyle.
However, he is one of the great big elephants in the room

 

[keek]

TEN times? Into a man on the ground? With the gun in possession of an agent? With people in the near vicinity who could've been hit?

It's ineptitude, imo.

jmopinion

They're among us, but few are listening, can't be bothered, bigger things to do such as keep our American as it was, as it WAS. IMO

 

[Yellowbelly]

I've justed watched the video below on the main BBC Ten O'Clock News on BBC1.

Ironically, if Alex Pretti had been arrested for this, he'd still be alive.

TNM | EXCLUSIVE: Man who appears to be Alex Pretti filmed in altercation with federal agents

EXCLUSIVE: On January 13th, The News Movement filmed a man who appears to be Alex Pretti interacting with federal immigration agents. Our footage was analyzed by the BBC, whose facial recognition technology confirmed his identity to a 97% degree of accuracy. We were filming a documentary about...

www.thenewsmovement.com