People keep arguing about Alex Pretti like it’s only about the split-second shooting. But CNN’s reporting makes a narrower, more provable question unavoidable:
When agencies formalize “intel collection” on non-arrest protesters and observers, you’re building a pipeline where a person can be “known” to the system before anything criminal is ever alleged.
The Broken RibThe Broken Rib
About a week before Pretti’s death, sources told CNN he was tackled by federal officers while protesting or observing an attempted detention. He described multiple agents tackling him, with one leaning on his back. He suffered a broken rib. CNN also reports records consistent with treatment for a broken rib.
The “Non-Arrest Intel” PipelineThe “Non-Arrest Intel” Pipeline
Then zoom out one step. Earlier this month, a DHS official in Minneapolis circulated a memo directing agents to use a form titled “intel collection non-arrests” to input personal information on “protesters and agitators”, after this info had been shared more informally.
The same reporting says Pretti’s name was known to federal agents, while noting it’s unclear whether this new form was used for him.
NSPM-7: Context, Not ConspiracyNSPM-7: Context, Not Conspiracy
Here’s where NSPM-7 matters as context, not as conspiracy theory.
NSPM-7 (September 25, 2025) is a White House national security memorandum on “countering domestic terrorism and organized political violence.” It’s not a law passed by Congress, but it does direct agencies and set a posture. In the memo’s own text, it describes an “anti-fascism” umbrella and lists ideological “threads,” including “anti-Christianity,” alongside “anti-Americanism” and “anti-capitalism.”
Scope guardrail: I am not claiming NSPM-7 caused the Pretti shooting, and I’m not claiming the Minneapolis “non-arrest intel” form was created because of NSPM-7. The public reporting here does not prove a direct provenance link.
The Governance RiskThe Governance Risk
I’m pointing to a governance risk you can evaluate without ideology:
When the state expands threat frameworks and builds intake pipelines for “non-arrest” protest intel, the guardrails have to be explicit: predicate, minimization, retention limits, sharing rules, audits, and penalties for abuse.
If “non-arrest intel collection” is legitimate, publish the rules. If it isn’t, stop doing it.
Sources: