Trump's late-night posting binge includes bogus "treason" claim against Obama, but the real story is Tulsi Gabbard's presence at FBI raid in Georgia

Why was Tulsi Gabbard at FBI raid in Georgia? (NBC News)

Any American who still doubts that a madman presides over the White House should put those qualms to rest after President Donald Trump unleashed a torrent of crazed social-media posts overnight on Thursday (1/29/26). Trump long has been known for posting online screeds in the middle of the night, so much in fact that quite a few observers have asked, in so many words, "When does this guy ever sleep?"

Yesterday's keyboard session was notable because it essentially was a rerun of "Trump's Greatest Hits," focusing on chestnuts of insanity that made their debut in May-July of 2025. Those include claims that former President Barack Obama had tapped Trump's phones, thus committing "treason" that required an arrest and prosecution; claims that China, Iran, and Italy (among others) helped Obama "install (Joe) Biden as a puppet"; and claims that his 2020 defeat to Biden was partially the result of a "crooked" election in Georgia.

By continuing to gripe about his 2020 loss in Georgia, Trump opened the door for what might become a major story involving Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. That's because Gabbard was spotted on Wednesday (1/28/29) at an election center in Fulton County, GA, where the FBI conducted a raid seeking ballots from the 2020 presidential election, which Trump has falsely claimed he won. All of this is giving off early whiffs of a scandal, raising questions such as:

(1) Was the FBI raid designed to bolster Trump's claim that he was the victim of election fraud in 2020?

(2) Was the raid designed to find evidence of wrongdoing by Obama, Biden, or other Democrats, continuing the retribution tour against perceived political opponents that has been a hallmark of Trump's  second term?

(3) Why was Gabbard present at the raid, given that her job is to track threats from foreign adversaries? In fact, Gabbard is prohibited by law from taking part in domestic law enforcement. Is she unaware of restrictions on her job?

(4) With Trump struggling to stay afloat amid self-inflicted headaches in Minnesota, Venezuela, Iran, Greenland, Denmark, and all over Europe -- where allies now seem to be distancing themselves from a "strong man" regime that appears to have shattered their trust -- will the press smell weakness and launch investigative efforts that could produce Watergate-style revelations?

As for Trump's madcap posting session, the mainstream press largely ignored it, probably because it included recycled claims he made last year -- almost all of which have been discredited. Several left-leaning online sites, however, spotlighted the story of a president whose mental health has come under growing scrutiny. Trump's latest series of rants are not likely to ease concerns that he is not all there. The following is from a HuffPost report under the headline "Trump Makes Wild Accusation Against Obama In Unhinged Evening Posting Spree." Deputy Editor Ed Mazza writes:

Many are calling on President Donald Trump to help turn down the national temperature in the wake of the violence in Minneapolis, which included federal agents shooting and killing two American citizens. Instead, Trump on Wednesday evening went on a posting spree, sharing memes, conspiracy theories and outright lies.

In one post on his Truth Social site, he accused former President Barack Obama of “treason”:

The post included a video from last summer in which Trump claimed Obama was caught “absolutely cold” trying to “rig” elections, along with former President Joe Biden, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former FBI director James Comey.

“Barack Hussein Obama is the ringleader,” Trump claimed in the video.

“It’s there, he’s guilty. This was treason, this was every word you can think of,” he added.

         No such evidence has ever emerged. 

In fact, Trump frequently uses the word treason, but there is little reason to believe he knows what it means. Just because an intellectually challenged president -- who has no clue about most matters of constitutional import -- makes an outrageous claim, it does not mean Barack Obama ever came close to committing actual treason. As Pete Williams of NBC News reported in 2019:

Once again . . . President Donald Trump used the T-word, this time saying that former FBI officials who were involved in investigating his campaign committed treason.

Asked at a White House event which of his adversaries he had in mind when he accused them of treason, he said, "A number of people. They have unsuccessfully tried to take down the wrong person." He then specified former FBI director James Comey, former acting FBI director Andrew McCabe, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, and former FBI agent Peter Strzok.

"That's treason. They couldn't win the election, and that's what happened."

But that isn't what the Constitution says treason is. It doesn’t mean being disloyal to the president. And it certainly would not apply to any actions against a private citizen, which Donald Trump was as a candidate for president.

Here's what the Constitution says (Article III, Section 3): "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

"Enemy" means a country or an entity that has declared war or is in a state of open war against the US. "Aid and comfort" must be something material, not words of encouragement.

Trump's confusion about treason was not even the most bizarre claim he made in the wee hours of Thursday. Mazza writes:

In addition, Trump shared a bizarre post claiming China, Iran, Italy, Merrill Lynch, the CIA, the FBI and others all worked with Obama to “install Biden as a puppet.” There’s no evidence for any of that, either, but Trump has for years pushed conspiracy theories about the 2016 and 2020 elections.

Earlier in the day, the FBI executed a search warrant at a Georgia election office. That’s the same state where Trump infamously demanded that Georgia’s Republican secretary of state “find” enough votes for him to win during a phone call he made after losing the 2020 election.

Trump also shared two posts claiming that Walmart would be closing 250 stores in California due to the state’s minimum wage. Although that’s not true, Trump included these lies along with other attacks against California and its Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, who is considering a run for president in 2028.

Newsom fired back with a response from his “Press Office” account:

In the last 60 minutes, the President has posted 56 times on Truth Social.

One post claims Walmart is closing 85% of its California stores because of our "$22 minimum wage."

Another features an AI-generated video in which a robot accuses Gov. Newsom of running a drug-money laundering scheme out of the Governor's Office with the Mexican cartel.

Just to clarify:

-- Walmart's 303 stores in California are open.

-- The AI robot is lying. Gov. Newsom is not Pablo Escobar.

We cannot believe we have to say any of this out loud.

We cannot believe this is real life.

And we truly cannot believe this man has the nuclear codes.

Deep breaths, everyone. Three more years.

What could be the fallout of Trump's visit to the "Land of Looney Tunes"? I suspect the president will come to regret the FBI raid in Georgia, especially if he ordered it? I suspect he also will regret not ordering Tulsi Gabbard to stay away from the raid. In fact, he likely will regret ever nominating her as intelligence chief because she has set herself up to become the centerpiece of an unsightly scandal.

We will explore these and related issues in upcoming posts.

Alex Pretti's broken rib in early clash with federal agents indicates feds knew of him; other developments could point to a case of premeditated murder

A new question hangs over the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis. Here is the disconcerting question that, based on my survey of social media, quite a few Americans appear to be asking: Is this a case of premeditated murder? 

New information, out in the past two days, suggests the answer might be yes. The first new info comes from a story published at CNN and Yahoo! News under the headline "Alex Pretti broke rib in confrontation with federal agents a week before death, sources say." Jeff Winter and Priscilla Alvarez write:

Federal immigration officers have been collecting personal information about protesters and agitators in Minneapolis, sources told CNN – and had documented details about Alex Pretti before he was shot to death on Saturday.

It is unclear how Pretti first came to the attention of federal authorities, but sources told CNN that about a week before his death, he suffered a broken rib when a group of federal officers tackled him while he was protesting their attempt to detain other individuals.

In a statement, the Department of Homeland Security said that “DHS law enforcement has no record of this incident.”

Were DHS officials telling the truth with that one? Does anyone in the Donald Trump administration ever tell the truth, especially when it is in their interest to cover something up? Here is more from Winter and  Alvarez:

A memo sent earlier this month to agents temporarily assigned to the city asked them to “capture all images, license plates, identifications, and general information on hotels, agitators, protestors, etc., so we can capture it all in one consolidated form,” according to correspondence reviewed by CNN.

Pretti’s previous encounter is another reflection of the aggressive approach federal agents are taking with observers and protesters – a philosophy underscored by the request for agents to collect information about protesters whose activities are broadly protected by the First Amendment. 

Hmmm . . . the First Amendment sounds like a reference to the U.S. Constitution, the part we know as the Bill of Rights. Have Trump officials ever let the Bill of Rights keep them from doing whatever the hell they want? I've seen no signs of that happening yet. Now we learn that DHS is gathering information on protesters:

DHS has repeatedly warned of threats against federal law enforcement officers during immigration enforcement operations—and criticized protesters who they argue are impeding those operations. On Tuesday, the department also publicized an online tip form to share information about people allegedly harassing ICE officers.

“When our law enforcement encounter a violent agitator who is breaking the law, obstructing law enforcement or assaulting them, our law enforcement make records to advance prosecution. This is not ground breaking, it is standard protocol,” said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin in a statement.

So using a cell phone to film a public event now is considered "obstructing law enforcement" and can lead to prosecution? That probably would be news to quite a few Ivy League law professors. How did Pretti get crossways with Border Patrol scoundrels roughly one week before they killed him? The CNN/Yahoo! report has answers:

The earlier incident started when [Pretti] stopped his car after observing ICE agents chasing what he described as a family on foot, and began shouting and blowing his whistle, according to a source who asked not to be named out of fear of retribution.

Pretti later told the source that five agents tackled him and one leaned on his back – an encounter that left him with a broken rib. The agents quickly released him at the scene.

“That day, he thought he was going to die,” said the source.

Pretti was later given medication consistent with treating a broken rib, according to records reviewed by CNN.

Trump officials now seem obsessed with protesters and "agitators," even those they have beaten and injured, who likely have grounds to sue them:

Earlier this month, a DHS official in Minneapolis sent a memo to Immigration and Customs Enforcement Homeland Security Investigations officers assigned to the state on temporary duty asking them to use a form to input information on protesters and agitators.

The form — titled “intel collection non-arrests” — allows agents to fill in personal information of agitators and protesters who they encounter. It’s not clear whether other agencies in Minnesota are also using the form.

Previously, agents had informally shared information about protesters and agitators with each other, the memo said.

Pretti’s name was known to federal agents, according to a source – though it’s unclear whether the new intake form was used to share his information.

It’s also not clear whether the federal agents who encountered Pretti on Saturday recognized him before they confronted him – eventually wrestling him to the ground, taking a gun from his waistband and then fatally shooting him.

Some Trump officials have spoken publicly about the idea of creating a database of protesters, though it’s not clear what ICE has done with the information collected through the form circulated to agents in Minneapolis.

“One thing I’m pushing for right now … we’re going to create a database where those people that are arrested for interference, impeding and assault, we’re going to make them famous,” Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar, told Fox News earlier this month. “We’re going to put their face on TV. We’re going to let their employers, in their neighborhoods, in their schools, know who these people are.”

On Sunday, a DHS spokeswoman denied the agency was compiling a database of “domestic terrorists” after a video in Maine showed a federal agent recording the license plate of a woman observing him during an operation and telling her, “We have a nice little database and now you are considered a domestic terrorist.”

McLaughlin told CNN about the Maine incident, “There is NO database of ‘domestic terrorists’ run by DHS. We do of course monitor and investigate and refer all threats, assaults and obstruction of our officers to the appropriate law enforcement. Obstructing and assaulting law enforcement is a felony and a federal crime.”

McLaughlin seems to have some clue about the actual relevant law, but that likely cannot be said for FBI Director Kash Patel. Consider this from CNN/Yahoo!:

In her statement to CNN on Tuesday, McLaughlin reiterated there is no DHS database.

Federal officials have made clear they are investigating anti-ICE activities they allege crossed the line into violence.

On Monday, FBI Director Kash Patel said the agency was investigating Signal group chats used by observers to share information about ICE activities, warning on a conservative podcast that people cannot “create a scenario that illegally entraps and puts law enforcement in harm’s way.”

On Tuesday, DHS announced it was launching an investigation into a U.S.  citizen “who attempted to purchase a firearm on two separate occasions,” allegedly stated she wanted to “protect herself from ICE Agents, and also to kill ICE Agents.”

What is the problem with Patel's statement? It indicates he has no clue about the nature of entrapment. He suggests it would be a crime too entrap law enforcement. What's the reality? Consider this from the Law Offices of John F. Marshall, a New Jersey law firm:

You’ve probably heard of the term “entrapment” before, but you may not understand exactly what it means in the legal sense. Though you may presume that entrapment is an illegal act, it’s not a crime at all. That means that those who engage in it are not subject to prosecution or penalties.  

Entrapment is an affirmative legal defense. In the most basic sense, it occurs when a government official, such as a police officer, uses threats, fraud, or harassment to induce or coerce someone to commit a crime they wouldn’t ordinarily commit. Defendants who can prove with a preponderance of the evidence that entrapment has occurred will likely be acquitted of the charges for which they are being tried.

In short, law-enforcement officers can engage in entrapment against others, and defendants can use that to get a not-guilty verdict. But it is not a legal wrong that can be committed against officers.

It is hard to imagine anyone being as wrong about a legal subject as Kash Patel is about entrapment. And he's head of the FBI! That's the kind of "expertise" you get with the Trump administration.

As for the question of premeditated murder in the Alex Pretti shooting, we will examine that issue in an upcoming post.

New York Times video analysis shows feds' version of the Alex Pretti shooting is riddled with lies, and agents' poor judgment caused a mild incident to turn fatal

With Alex Pretti subdued on the ground, an agent (left) prepares to fire the first shot (NY Times)

Federal agents who killed Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday made a series of bad decisions that turned what could have been a relatively mild incident into a fatal encounter, according to a new video analysis published Sunday (1/26/26) by The New York Times.

Five reporters -- Devon Lum, Haley Willis, Alexander Cardia, Dmitriy Khavin, and Ainara Tiefenthaler -- conducted The Times analysis, reporting under the headline "New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti: A frame-by-frame assessment of actions by Alex Pretti and the two officers who fired 10 times shows how lethal force came to be used against a man who didn't pose a threat.

The video can be viewed by clicking the link above. The piece is professionally edited and narrated, providing the most concise and clear description of the incident I've seen so far. In fact, it might be the most easily understood account of the Pretti shooting any of us are likely to see. That The Times was able to pull this together so soon after the shooting is quite a feat of journalism -- and it likely will answer questions many Americans have about what happened. 

We encourage our readers to view the video and save the link for future reference. The video is disturbing to watch -- even if you have watched enough video to know what is about to happen. But I hope that won't keep you from watching it for a number of reasons -- (1) It shows, in stark images and chilling audio, the kind of police state the Donald Trump administration has unleashed upon our country; (2) It can be used to help counter lies Trump officials already have told, plus new lies they likely will create in the future; (3) It should help all of us become determined to see that the killers (clearly seen in the video), and the officials pulling their strings, are held accountable -- hopefully bringing an end to Trump's nightmarish reign as soon as possible.

As noted, The Times report is in a video format, but it also includes a written summary, and we will base our report on that transcript:

When federal agents shot and killed 37-year-old Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday, officials said he approached agents with a handgun, intending to massacre them.

“An individual approached U.S. Border Patrol agents with a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun.”

“This looks like a situation where an individual arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.” 

But a Times analysis of video footage from the scene in the moments when two officers opened fire, clearly contradict federal government statements. Pretti does not appear to pose a threat to agents. In fact, at several critical junctures, he is outnumbered and under their control. Here are the key moments that reveal what happened:

The video begins with Pretti walking among the crowd, filming protesters, directing traffic.  A lot appears to be going on, but everything seems relatively calm, but that is about to change:

We see Pretti walking about, filming a group of protesters who are speaking with a federal agent. He’s holding a cell phone in one hand. The other hand is empty. It’s just over 30 seconds before the shooting when a protester is pushed to the ground. Pretti steps between her and the agent who’d shoved her, briefly putting his hand on the agent’s waist. The agent pepper-sprays Pretti’s face. We can see Pretti is still holding his phone in one hand while holding his other hand up to protect himself against the spray.

At this point, the story we can see unfold with our own eyes begins to veer wildly from what federal officials have told us:

Contrary to statements by federal officials, he’s made no threatening movements towards agents. Pretti, who had a firearms permit, carries a gun holstered on his right hip, but he doesn’t reach for it. And it appears agents are unaware the gun is even there. He reaches toward the protester, apparently trying to help her up, while agents begin grabbing him from behind. He tries to pull away, and again he makes no threatening movements towards the agents. But agents pull him backwards and force him to the ground.

With a series of loud pops, the scene takes a horrifying turn:

Then shots ring out. [gunfire] Now we’ll slow things down, so each moment is clear. Here is Pretti. Several agents are restraining him. And this is the Border Patrol agent who will shoot him first. This appears to be when agents first notice that Pretti is carrying a firearm and yell that he has a gun. Watching the same moment from a different angle, the agent who first pepper-sprayed Pretti beats him several times with the spray canister. We can see that both of Pretti’s arms are pinned down by his head. This agent in gray reaches to remove Pretti’s weapon from his hip, as this agent unholsters his gun, nudges the agent in gray out of the way and fires.

The Times makes expert use of slow motion, close-ups, and graphics to slow down and clarify what is happening in a chaotic scene:

[gunfire] Let’s rewind and focus on the agent who shoots first. Just seconds before he fired, he was facing away from Pretti and focusing on an entirely different situation as he tries to spray a nearby woman with an irritant. The spray appears to malfunction, and the agent turns as he adjusts it. That’s when someone yells that Pretti has a gun. And around five seconds after fully turning his attention toward Pretti, the agent draws his weapon and shoots  [gunfire]. His arm visibly recoils at the first shot.

At this point, Pretti is not a threat, and he did not appear to be a threat throughout the confrontation, contrary to what federal officials have stated:

The firearm has clearly been removed from the scrum when the first shots are fired toward Pretti at close range. [gunfire] The officer who disarmed Pretti can be seen reacting to the sound of the first shot, looking back toward the skirmish. The shooter was standing behind Pretti and not under direct threat, contradicting statements from Homeland Security officials that he fired defensive shots. He also has a vantage point to see the gun pulled from the scene, but it’s unclear if he did and whether he thought a weapon was still on Pretti. He then fires three more shots from behind Pretti, whose arms are down as he appears to brace himself against the pavement. In one hand, he still holds his phone, and in his other, his glasses. The agent in gray, who removed Pretti’s gun, carries it across the street. Pretti is disarmed and falling to the ground. But the agent who first pepper-sprayed Pretti and later beat him with a canister, also pulls out his gun. From a distance, despite the fact that Pretti is lying motionless on the ground, these two agents fire six more shots. Neither is under threat. [screaming] [gunfire, screaming] In total, the agents fire 10 shots in five seconds. 

A report from CBS News and Yahoo! confirms that two officers fired their guns. The video ends with a curious moment, one that indicates federal agents in the Trump Era are so poorly trained that they often fail to communicate with the public -- seemingly with no skills in de-escalation -- but they also don't communicate well with each other:

After the shooting, an agent kneeling next to Pretti’s body asks where the gun is — — showing that not all of the officers seem to know the weapon had been removed. Agents appear to begin giving medical aid. About 31 seconds elapsed from the time agents first physically engaged Pretti to the moment the last shot was fired.

Who is the most vile Trumper of them all? Greg Bovino, of Border Patrol, gets our vote after he praised federal agents for killing Alex Pretti in Minneapolis

Greg Bovino: Sub-Human Excrement (Axios)

The Donald Trump administration is filled with so many incompetent, integrity-challenged sycophants that it's almost impossible to rank them on a scale of detestability. You can't go wrong, of course, by starting with the head guy, Trump himself. But where do you plug in such rogues as J.D. Vance, Kristi Noem, Pete Hegseth, RFK Jr., Pam Bondi, Marco Rubio . . . and the list goes on?

In the wake of federal agents fatally shooting 37-year-old ICU nurse Alex Pretti on Saturday in Minneapolis, I have a new candidate for Most Detestable Trumper. That would be Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino, whose utter lack of empathy following what best could be described as a "tragedy for American democracy," raised an obvious question: Is this guy sub-human?

Let's consider this Axios report about Bovino's comments the day after the shooting which comes under the headline "Border Patrol's Bovino praises agents who killed Alex Pretti." (By the way, I'm not making that headline up, as breaking news reporter Avery Lotz makes clear in her report):

Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino praised federal agents who fatally shot Minneapolis nurse Alex Pretti, insisting without explanation or evidence Sunday that Pretti was "there for a reason."

Bovino actually got something right with that statement: Pretti was there for a reason, to be a legal observer and help direct traffic, according to those who knew him. He was not, however there to cause trouble, as Bovino suggested.

Outrageous comments from Trump insiders did not end there. Bovino also said Pretti wanted to  "massacre law enforcement." White House adviser Stephen Miller called Pretti a "would-be assassin."

The words of a doctor who witnessed the shooting indicate the killer agents are deeply disturbed individuals:

“I saw that the victim was lying on his side and was surrounded by several ICE agents. I was confused as to why the victim was on his side, because that is not standard practice when a victim has been shot. Checking for a pulse and administering CPR is standard practice. Instead of doing either of those things, the ICE agents appeared to be counting his bullet wounds."

The Axios report provides broad context surrounding the shooting, and that includes more Bovino comments that make the mind swirl. In one, he refers to Pretti as "the suspect." In another, he called Border Patrol agents "the victims." That brought two thoughts to my mind: (1) Who killed whom here? (2) No wonder Trump hired this guy; he makes Trump sound sane. Avery Lotz writes:

The big picture: For the second time this month, videos of a Minnesota resident being shot by federal agents contradict the narrative federal officials pushed. Both times, officials doubled down with ramped-up rhetoric.

Driving the news: "The suspect put himself in that situation," Bovino said on CNN's State of the Union Sunday. "The victims are the Border Patrol agents there."

• Federal officials said DHS officers were conducting a targeted operation against an undocumented immigrant when the confrontation occurred.
• Videos from multiple angles show Pretti filming a scene where civilians encounter federal agents. An agent shoves a person to the ground before spraying Pretti with a chemical irritant.
• Officers wrestle Pretti to the ground and appear to remove a gun from his waist. Then shots ring out.
• The Department of Homeland Security claimed without evidence Pretti was there to "massacre law enforcement."
• 
  

In a fine moment for journalism, CNN's Dana Bash pressed Bovino on Sunday for answers he did not want to give.

Friction point: CNN's Dana Bash repeatedly pushed Bovino for evidence to support that claim Sunday. Instead, he said without offering new details that officers prevented "any specific shootings" of law enforcement.

• He added, "So, good job for our law enforcement in taking him down before he was able to do that."
• Bash asked for evidence Pretti went after law enforcement or was trying to impede their operation. Bovino said Pretti injected himself into "an active law enforcement scene."
• Bovino also offered no evidence to show Pretti brandished a weapon, as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem suggested.

• State of play: Bovino complained about "freeze-frame adjudication" of the incident, but claimed Pretti came to the scene "for a reason."

  • Bovino refused to weigh in on footage showing an officer disarming Pretti before shooting him, saying, "we don't know that agent was taking any gun away."
  • Bovino was adamant Pretti assaulted law enforcement officers who were trying to de-escalate the situation, despite the contradictory video evidence.
  • 
    

  What we're watching: Gov. Tim Walz said Saturday the state will conduct its own investigation and blasted the administration's initial account as "lies."

• •  DHS blocked local agents from the scene, Minnesota's Bureau of Criminal Apprehension said.
  • A federal judge granted a temporary restraining order to prevent federal agents from destroying or altering evidence, including evidence feds already removed.
  • 
    

  Go deeper: Gun rights groups challenge shooting of legally armed Minneapolis man.

Witness provides details about Alex Pretti shooting in court filing, showing feds initiated the confrontation, not the other way around -- as White House claims

Feds spray Alex Pretti before beating him on the ground (The Guardian)

An anonymous witness has provided details in a court filing  about Saturday's fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minnesota. The witness' account largely matches the description of events we reported in a post on Sunday (1/25/26). Here is the latest from a report at ABC News under the headline "Witness describes shooting in federal court filing":

An unnamed witness provided more details in a federal court filing Saturday night about the shooting in Minneapolis of 37-year-old Alex Pretti.

The witness, whose name was redacted in court documents, said immigration agents pepper-sprayed three observers, including Pretti, before an agent shoved a woman to the ground.

"More agents came over and grabbed the man who was still trying to help the woman get up."

The witness said that agents pushed Pretti to the ground and added that "it didn't look like he was trying to resist, just trying to help the woman up."

The most important point from the witness' statement: Agents initiated the confrontation with Pretti, not the other way around -- as has been described by accounts from the Trump White House. The witness goes on to describe a brutal act of violence against Pretti, which he/she captured on video:

"They threw him to the ground. Four or five agents had him on the ground and they just started shooting him," the witness said. "They shot him so many times."

The witness said they recorded a video that "accurately depicts the events leading up to the agents shooting him and several minutes afterwards."

The declaration was filed Saturday by the ACLU of Minnesota as part of an emergency motion to lift a stay on a federal judge's order that barred immigration agents from arresting protesters or using nonlethal weapons against them.