Kristi Noem's War on Truth

The most disturbing thing about what happened in Minneapolis isn’t only that another civilian is dead. It’s how quickly the Trump administration closed ranks to bury the truth with a false narrative.

After federal officers shot ICU nurse Alex Pretti dead, Trump officials did not pause to gather facts, preserve credibility, or show humility in the face of a chaotic, high-stakes incident. They did the opposite. They sprinted to the cameras and social media to build a narrative in which the victim was not simply dead but deserved to be dead, just as they did two weeks ago with Renee Good.

They claimed Pretti was a violent threat, an “assassin,” a would-be killer who arrived with murderous intent, and they did it while video evidence began circulating almost immediately that contradicted those claims. This is not a communications problem. It’s a governing strategy.

"Violence against a government because of ideological reasons and for reasons to resist and to perpetuate violence. That is the definition of domestic terrorism," Noem said at a Saturday press conference.

“Fearing for his life and for the lives of his fellow officers around him, an agent fired defensive shots,” she continued. “This looks like a situation where an individual arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.”

Within hours, the Department of Homeland Security was distributing statements that described Pretti as an armed suspect who “brandished” his weapon and “violently resisted,” that officers “attempted to disarm” him, and that an agent fired “defensive shots.” From there the language inflated rapidly, like a cloud of nitrous oxide strategically loosed to confuse and disorient the public.

A senior White House adviser labeled Pretti a would-be assassin. A commander told the public he came to “massacre law enforcement.” But video reportedly showed something far less cinematic: officers swarming a man who appeared to be holding a phone, not a gun, taking him to the ground, and only then removing a weapon that remained holstered until an officer removed it.

If those details are true—and they certainly require a real investigation—then what we’re witnessing is not “fog of war.” It is something darker: a coordinated campaign to discredit the dead before facts can compete.

The administration isn’t merely shaping public perception. It is preemptively poisoning the investigative process. Kristi Noem is a central figure in this effort, not as a bystander, but as an architect.

Noem did not say, “We are gathering evidence.” She did not say, “We will wait for body-camera footage and an independent review.” She did not say, “We grieve the loss of life and will be transparent.”

Instead, she declared the killing justified—within hours—framing it as a clear-cut case of heroism under threat. She repeated the loaded language of mortal danger: officers “fearing for their lives,” an individual allegedly showing up to “inflict maximum damage” and “kill law enforcement.” She called it a “violent riot.” She alleged Pretti assaulted officers with weapons, despite video evidence contradicting the claim.

This is not leadership. It is a prosecutorial closing argument delivered before the jury has even been seated. To prevent a jury being seated.

And that matters, because when the nation’s top homeland security official preaches certainty in the absence of confirmed facts, she isn’t informing the public. She’s obstructing it. The result is a grotesque inversion of justice: the victim is put on trial while the shooters are shielded from scrutiny.

The administration’s defenders will say officials were responding to a fast-moving situation. That they had to protect their officers. That they were relying on initial reports.

But this administration doesn’t merely “get ahead of the story.” It tramples the story. It floods the zone with certainty, accusation, and moral judgment before anyone has time to examine the evidence. And then, even if the facts shift later, the damage is already done. The goal isn’t accuracy. The goal is permanence.

It’s a political tactic as old as authoritarianism and as modern as the algorithm: label the victim a monster, call dissent “terrorism,” and treat skepticism as treason.

That’s why the language matters. “Assassin.” “Massacre.” “Terrorists.” These words don’t describe reality. They are verbal obfuscations designed to tell the public: don’t ask questions, don’t trust your eyes, don’t demand accountability.

Their language is designed to turn public outrage into public indifference. To turn grieving into suspicion. To turn civil rights into conditional privileges. And to turn federal force into something that begins to resemble occupation. A system that polices communities not with the rule of law or the consent of the governed, but with the misapplication of power aided by self-evident propaganda.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz described it plainly: the rush to judgment, the slander within minutes, the insistence that people shouldn’t trust what they can see. That is the core of the project. Not just defending federal agents, but discrediting objective reality itself.

Kristi Noem’s role in this is especially damning because she isn’t merely echoing the talking points. She’s blessing them with authority. She is taking a death, wrapping it in performative certainty, and presenting it as a morality play where the state is always righteous and the dead are always guilty.

And it’s worth stating clearly: the United States cannot function if federal agencies respond to killings the way an authoritarian responds to criticism: by smearing the victim, sanctifying the shooter, and daring anyone to object.

A democratic government investigates first, speaks second, and accepts accountability as a duty.

This government shoots first and deflects questions later. It issues a verdict, manufactures a villain, and treats the truth as an enemy combatant.

In Minneapolis, a man is dead. His family will live with that forever. But the rest of us are being asked to live with something else too: a government that lies reflexively and aggressively in defense of its own violence.

The lie isn’t a mistake. It’s the point. Because if the government can persuade you that a man holding a phone is an assassin…then it can persuade you of anything. As French enlightenment philosopher Voltaire is oft credited with saying: “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”