Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent engaged in a tense on-air exchange Sunday with ABC News host Jonathan Karl over the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, pushing back forcefully on the network’s framing of the incident and arguing the tragedy could have been avoided had Pretti not arrived at the protest armed.
The confrontation unfolded near the end of Bessent’s appearance on This Week, when Karl pressed the secretary about the shooting that occurred a day earlier and questioned whether the Trump administration should be concerned about another American citizen being killed by federal law enforcement.
Bessent said the death was a tragedy, but quickly shifted focus to the broader environment in Minnesota, blaming Democratic Gov. Tim Walz for inflaming tensions in the state. Bessent accused Walz of “fomenting chaos” and said the governor’s rhetoric had helped stir up hostility toward federal immigration officers.
Walz, Bessent noted, had previously referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement as President Donald Trump’s “modern-day Gestapo,” a remark the Treasury secretary said encouraged aggressive protests and heightened the risk of confrontation between demonstrators and law enforcement.
Bessent then echoed comments made earlier by Border Patrol Chief Greg Bovino, who said it was horrific that Pretti lost his life but emphasized that showing up to a protest with a firearm dramatically increased the likelihood of a violent encounter.
“I am sorry this gentleman is dead,” Bessent said. “But he did bring a 9 mm semi-automatic weapon with two cartridges to what was supposed to be a peaceful protest.”
That statement triggered a heated back-and-forth between Bessent and Karl. The ABC host pushed back, noting that Pretti had worked as an ICE nurse and for the Department of Veterans Affairs and claiming there was no evidence he brandished the weapon.
Bessent immediately rejected the implication that those details changed the core issue.
“But he brought a gun!” Bessent shot back, raising his voice. He repeatedly emphasized that bringing a firearm to a protest fundamentally alters the situation, regardless of intent.
Karl attempted to interject, pointing out that the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms. But Bessent was not persuaded, interrupting to ask Karl whether he had ever attended a protest himself.
Karl responded that he had only been to protests in his capacity as a journalist, not as a participant. Bessent seized on that distinction to drive home his point.
“I’ve been to a protest,” Bessent said. “Guess what? I didn’t bring a gun, I brought a billboard.”
The exchange underscored the sharp divide over how the incident is being portrayed and who bears responsibility for the circumstances that led to the shooting. Bessent’s comments aligned with the administration’s broader argument that armed individuals injecting themselves into law enforcement operations create inherently dangerous situations.
By contrast, Karl’s questioning reflected ongoing media skepticism toward federal law enforcement actions and an effort to focus on the outcome rather than the context leading up to it.
The interview ended shortly after Bessent’s final remark, capping a combative exchange that highlighted the political and cultural fault lines surrounding immigration enforcement, protest activity, and public safety.
