Have the national guard members who were shot in dc passed
Executive summary
Available, contemporaneous reporting indicates the two West Virginia National Guard members shot near the White House on Nov. 26, 2025—identified as Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Andrew Wolfe, 24—were initially reported in critical condition and had undergone surgery; multiple outlets state they remained alive and "in critical condition" [1] [2] [3]. Some early statements from West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey suggested they had died, but he later “backtracked” and officials including the U.S. Attorney and news organizations reported both victims were in critical condition after surgery [4] [5].
1. What the official reporting says about the victims’ status
Major news organizations and federal officials consistently reported the two guards were critically wounded and had surgery but were being treated in hospitals rather than confirmed dead: The Washington Post named the victims and said both “remain in critical condition” after surgery [1]; the BBC likewise reported both were out of surgery and still critical [2]; CNN cited U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro identifying the injured as Sarah Beckstrom and Andrew Wolfe and described the victims as critically wounded [3]. Reuters described them as “critically wounded” in a targeted ambush and noted authorities had not established a motive [4].
2. Conflicting early statements and a gubernatorial reversal
Governor Patrick Morrisey initially posted that the two guards had been killed, then retracted or backtracked amid conflicting information, which created confusion that spread on social media and in some local reporting [5] [6]. Deadline’s reporting notes Morrisey’s initial tweets and subsequent correction; contemporaneous wire coverage and news outlets show law-enforcement and federal officials maintained the victims were critically injured, not confirmed deceased, during the hours after the attack [7] [4].
3. Why the confusion matters: rapid news cycles and official sources
The episode illustrates how early, unverified statements by elected officials can cascade into public belief before hospital or law-enforcement confirmations arrive. Reuters and other outlets documented law enforcement giving status updates that the victims were critically wounded and that the suspect was in custody, while the governor’s earlier social-post casualty claim lacked corroboration from medical or federal authorities [4] [5]. Journalistic practice in breaking incidents requires confirmation from multiple authoritative sources—local hospitals, police, or federal prosecutors—before declaring deaths.
4. Legal and investigative context that shaped public messaging
U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro held a news conference outlining charges against the suspect and explicitly described the shooting facts while stating the victims’ condition; the FBI described the incident as under terrorism investigation, which kept federal officials as primary communicators of victim status and charges [8] [3]. Reporting also notes the suspect was identified as an Afghan national and that immigration processing for Afghan applicants was paused pending review—an example of how operational developments and policy responses immediately followed the incident and influenced public statements [9] [1].
5. What different outlets emphasized and potential agendas to watch for
Conservative and pro-administration outlets highlighted the suspect’s immigration status and used the attack to press for tougher immigration vetting [10] [9]. Some outlets emphasized the governor’s initial casualty tweets, which amplified a narrative of immediate fatalities [6]. International and mainstream outlets focused on official updates from the U.S. Attorney, FBI, and hospital reports, stressing the victims’ critical condition and ongoing investigation [2] [4]. Readers should note these differing emphases reflect editorial choices and political priorities that shaped coverage.
6. What is not found in current reporting
Available sources do not mention a final, definitive official hospital confirmation that the two guards have died; contemporaneous national outlets cited by this briefing report them as alive in critical condition after surgery [1] [2] [3]. Claims that both victims definitively passed away are not corroborated by the named federal and national media reports in this set of sources.
7. Bottom line for readers seeking certainty
As of the cited reporting, federal prosecutors and major news organizations state the two West Virginia guards shot near the White House were critically wounded and had undergone surgery; earlier tweets by the governor claiming fatalities were later contradicted by law-enforcement and hospital-focused reporting [1] [4] [5]. Because the situation evolved rapidly and some official statements conflicted, rely on follow-up confirmations from federal prosecutors, hospital statements, or major wire services for any final determination—current sources in this packet do not confirm deaths [1] [4].