Trump abandons attack mode as Minneapolis shooting backlash grows

The Trump administration has quickly abandoned its familiar “deny and attack” playbook after initially using it when federal agents shot dead Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday morning.

Within 24 hours, as various videos of the shooting circulated online, it became clear that the White House was out of step with public opinion.

Since then, the administration – and the president himself – have changed tack, blaming Democrats for what happened and focusing less on the actions of the American nurse who was killed.

Democrats, meanwhile, have increased their criticism of the president’s mass deportation policy and the aggresive tactics of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), leaning into a political fight that could result in a new government shutdown on Friday.

On Monday morning, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche described the situation as a “powder keg”. While he blamed the Democrats, many on both sides of America’s political divide will agree that the current situation is fraught with peril.

The initial administration response to Pretti’s death was straightforward. The 37-year-old was portrayed as a domestic terrorist bent on bloodshed.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said that Pretti wished to “inflict harm” and was “brandishing” a weapon. US Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino said that it “looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement”.

Senior presidential adviser Stephen Miller called Pretti a “would-be assassin”.

This White House has typically been quick to push back when criticised. “Deny and attack” has long been a bedrock Trump strategy for handling adversity.

But, perhaps tellingly, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt refused to echo Miller’s comments herself on Monday when pressed on whether the president agreed with his senior adviser. Instead, she said a full investigation would be carried out.

It was a notably more muted tone than that struck immediately after the shooting.

That initial response had echoed the path the administration took three weeks ago, when federal law enforcement shot and killed another Minneapolis resident, Renee Good. They said Good was a terrorist who had “weaponised” her vehicle in an attempt to injure ICE agents.

As with Good’s case, the federal government’s version of events has been challenged by local officials, eyewitnesses and the victim’s family.

In a statement on Sunday, Pretti’s parents asked for the truth to come out, adding: “The sickening lies told about our son by the administration are reprehensible and disgusting.”

Multiple videos of Saturday’s deadly encounter contradict many of the administration’s initial claims. The footage shows Pretti filming ICE agents with his mobile phone and helping a woman who is pushed over before both are pepper-sprayed. Pretti is visibly not holding a gun when he is wrestled to the ground.

DHS says Pretti had a 9mm semi-automatic handgun and two magazines of ammunition. Local police have said Pretti was a legal gun owner. Under Minnesota law, citizens can legally carry a concealed handgun in public, if they have a permit.

This time around, the administration’s initial response quickly had become difficult for the administration to maintain.

“People have had enough,” Minneapolis Police Brian O’Hara said, noting that his officers made hundreds of arrests of violent offenders last year without resorting to shooting. “This is not sustainable.”

Republicans in Washington DC and elsewhere have expressed growing unease with how the administration was handling the situation. Vermont Governor Phil Scott called the federal efforts in Minnesota “a complete failure of coordination of acceptable public safety and law enforcement practices, training and leadership” – at best.

At worst, he said, it was “deliberate federal intimidation and incitement of American citizens”.

In Congress, some Republicans expressed unease with the White House actions and called for new oversight.

Since Sunday night, there has been a marked change in tone from the White House. Veteran’s Affairs Secretary Doug Collins offered condolences to the Pretti family. The president posted a message on his Truth Social website calling the death “tragic” and blaming it on “Democrat ensued chaos” – a message echoed by Vice-President JD Vance.

On Monday morning, Trump posted that he was dispatching “border czar” Tom Homan to Minnesota to direct law-enforcement efforts there. Homan, who handled deportations during Democrat Barack Obama’s administration, is considered a more measured, politically attuned operator less prone to the kind of bombastic declarations recently made by Noem and Bovino.

“Tom is tough but fair, and will report directly to me,” Trump wrote.

While Homan’s assignment to Minneapolis may not necessarily reflect a change in policy – this administration has yet to show signs of backing away from its aggressive immigration enforcement – it could be a change in presentation, as the president tries to come to grips with a public mood that opinion surveys suggest is souring on how his immigration crackdown is being carried out.

In a CBS survey taken before the weekend’s shooting, 61% of respondents said that ICE is being “too tough when stopping and detaining people”, while 58% disapproved of his handling of immigration as a whole.

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, when asked by BBC News about Homan’s involvement, said that he may provide a new avenue to work with the administration.

“I don’t want to foreclose the possibility that reasonable minds can prevail,” he added, “but we are here exactly because the federal government had unreasonable positions.”

Another potential thaw came when Trump announced on Monday that he had spoken with Minnesota’s Democratic governor, Tim Walz.

“It was a very good call,” Trump wrote. “We, actually, seemed to be on a similar wavelength.”

That represents a marked cooling of what had been a series of heated exchanges between the two men in recent weeks – and could portend the kind of de-escalation in Minnesota that many politicians have been calling for.

That may not be enough for Washington Democrats, however, who have come under increasing pressure to draw a bright line against the Trump administration’s rhetoric and policy.

Congressman Tom Suozzi on Monday said he regretted voting for a recent Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill that contained money for immigration enforcement.

“I failed to view the DHS funding vote as a referendum on the illegal and immoral conduct of ICE in Minneapolis,” he posted on X. “I hear the anger from my constituents, and I take responsibility for that.”

Senate Democrats have announced they will now block that funding measure in their chamber, which would trigger a partial government shutdown on Friday night.

“I am voting against any funding for DHS until and unless more controls are put in place to hold ICE accountable,” said Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii. “These repeated incidents of violence across the country are unlawful, needlessly escalatory and making all of us less safe.”

Such a move is not without its own political risks, however. Democrats triggered a record-setting shutdown last autumn over health care subsidies but ultimately relented with little to show for it.

A new government shutdown – one that wouldn’t affect ICE funding but could hamper national emergency preparedness and other government functions – could produce a similarly limited results. Democrats will also be wary of pushing too far on immigration and law and order, two issues where they poll poorly.

At the moment, both Republicans and Democrats are grappling with how to handle what has become an explosive situation. At stake is the public perception of Trump’s immigration policy, a core political issue for the president and one that helped him win back the White House.