Trump Spokesperson Under Scrutiny for Comments on Alex Pretti Case

A contentious exchange unfolded during Monday’s White House press briefing when press secretary Karoline Leavitt fielded a question from Jordan Conradson, a correspondent for the right-wing outlet Gateway Pundit, who was seated in what the administration has designated as the “new media seat.”

Conradson’s question drew a comparison between public reactions to two fatal shootings involving federal agents: the recent death of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis and the January 6, 2021, shooting of Ashli Babbitt at the U.S. Capitol.

“With respect to the shooting in Minneapolis, we’re seeing massive outrage from mainstream media and the left,” Conradson said. “But I’m just wondering, where was that outrage when Ashli Babbitt, an Air Force veteran, was executed by Capitol Police officer Michael Byrd, who she posed no threat to in the U.S. Capitol?”

In response, Leavitt criticized what she characterized as “selective outrage” from “liberal biased media.” She proceeded to reference two other cases that have gained significant attention in conservative circles—the deaths of Laken Riley and Jocelyn Nungaray, both of which have been central to immigration policy debates in recent months.

The circumstances surrounding Pretti’s death remain a flashpoint for controversy. According to multiple witness videos, Border Patrol agents shot Pretti multiple times after he had been restrained on the ground. The footage appears to show that agents had already confiscated a legally owned firearm from Pretti’s waistband before the shooting occurred.

Witnesses maintain that Pretti, an ICU nurse who worked at a Veterans Affairs hospital, was holding a cell phone and attempting to assist a woman who had been pushed to the ground during the confrontation with federal agents. These accounts directly contradict the administration’s assertion that Pretti posed an imminent threat to officers.

The comparison to Babbitt’s case presents significant contextual differences. Babbitt was fatally shot during the January 6 Capitol breach as she attempted to climb through a broken window and enter a hallway where members of Congress had taken shelter. Video evidence shows that the Capitol Police officer who fired had his weapon drawn and had issued warnings to the crowd before Babbitt attempted to breach the barricade.

Law enforcement experts have noted the distinct operational contexts of these incidents. In Babbitt’s case, officers were defending a secure perimeter during an active breach of the Capitol building, while the Pretti incident involved a confrontation during what was reportedly a routine immigration enforcement operation.

The Department of Justice under the current administration recently reached a $5 million settlement with Babbitt’s family, a decision that has intensified debate about accountability in law enforcement use-of-force cases.

The press briefing exchange highlights the increasingly polarized public and political discourse surrounding law enforcement actions, particularly those involving federal agencies such as Border Patrol and Capitol Police. Media coverage of these incidents often splits along ideological lines, with different outlets emphasizing different aspects of the cases.

Security analysts point out that both incidents raise important questions about use-of-force protocols, officer training, and oversight mechanisms within federal law enforcement agencies. Civil liberties organizations have called for more transparency in both cases, arguing that comprehensive investigations are necessary regardless of the political implications.

As investigations into Pretti’s death continue, the incident has renewed calls from some advocacy groups for reforms to immigration enforcement operations and greater accountability for Border Patrol agents involved in use-of-force incidents. Meanwhile, Babbitt’s case remains a rallying point for those who question the security response during the Capitol breach.