What news sources talk about brandishing gun in Minneapolis shooting
Executive summary
Several major U.S. and international outlets reported that federal officials — including President Trump and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem — claimed the Minneapolis shooting victim, Alex Pretti, “brandished” a gun; at the same time, those same outlets and others published video analysis and witness affidavits that contradicted that claim and said the footage shows Pretti holding a phone, not a weapon [1] [2] [3] [4]. The coverage divides into two clear threads: reportage of the administration’s assertion that Pretti brandished a firearm, and independent reporting that the available video and sworn testimony do not support that assertion [1] [5] [6].
1. Who said Pretti “brandished” a gun, and which outlets relayed that claim
National political coverage repeatedly relayed senior Trump administration officials’ account that Pretti was an armed threat who “brandished” a weapon, with President Trump and DHS leaders cited by outlets such as The Guardian and ABC News reporting or summarizing those explicit claims [1] [7]. Reuters and Fox News also covered administration defenses of the shooting and noted officials’ assertions that the man possessed a firearm and agents acted in self‑defense, passing along the official narrative even as they sought confirmation [4] [8]. The Daily Mail similarly emphasized the federal account that Pretti “brandished” his legally owned handgun while describing the ensuing dispute [9].
2. Which news outlets reported video evidence and witness statements that contradict “brandishing”?
Major outlets including The Guardian, The New York Times, Reuters, PBS NewsHour, and the Washington Post published stories showing that video evidence and sworn witness affidavits do not corroborate the administration’s characterization that Pretti brandished a gun; those pieces either directly state that none of the available videos show him with a weapon or quote witnesses saying he did not brandish one [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [10]. The New York Times and The Guardian explicitly reported that bystander video appears to show Pretti holding a phone rather than a gun and filed affidavits saying he never brandished a weapon [2] [3] [5]. Reuters quoted Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara saying the “videos speak for themselves” and that he had seen no evidence Pretti brandished a gun [4].
3. Outlets attempting balance or flagging uncertainty
Some outlets relayed both the administration’s claim and the conflicting visual evidence in the same piece, presenting the official line while also reporting countervailing videos and testimony: Reuters, PBS, and the Washington Post ran articles that recorded DHS officials’ statements and then noted that police or independent video reviewers saw no sign of brandishing [4] [6] [10]. The New York Times’ live coverage carried administration claims but prominently said “none of the videos that have surfaced…show Pretti carrying a gun,” reflecting an editorial posture of weighing both claims and available footage [3].
4. Partisan and tabloid treatments of the “brandishing” allegation
Right‑leaning and tabloid outlets such as Fox News and the Daily Mail focused more on relaying the administration’s framing that an armed suspect posed a threat — narratives these outlets are more likely to emphasize — while also noting protests and local backlash; Fox’s live updates and the Daily Mail’s coverage foregrounded federal statements that justified the shooting [8] [9]. Conversely, outlets like The Guardian and BBC centered the contradictions between official claims and video/witness accounts, highlighting sworn affidavits and community reaction [1] [11].
5. What the reporting collectively shows and limits of available evidence
The corpus of reporting makes clear which news organizations propagated the administration’s “brandishing” claim (e.g., ABC News, Daily Mail, outlets that quoted Trump and DHS officials) and which organizations documented and emphasized discrepancies between that claim and visual/witness evidence (e.g., The Guardian, The New York Times, Reuters, PBS, Washington Post) [7] [9] [2] [3] [4] [6] [10]. Reporting to date relies on bystander video, sworn affidavits, official statements and preliminary agency comments; none of the provided sources contains a final investigative or prosecutorial finding that resolves the dispute, and therefore definitive conclusions about whether a gun was brandished await further official evidence and inquiry [2] [5] [3].