The Smearing of Alex Pretti: False Story That Slain VA Nurse Was Fired Traced to Vietnam-Based ‘Viet Spam’

MINNEAPOLIS — Alex Pretti was an intensive care nurse who cared for American veterans. He was also a 37-year-old U.S. citizen who was fatally shot by federal Border Patrol agents on a Minneapolis street on Jan. 24, 2026.

And almost immediately after his death, another battle began — this one over the truth about who Alex Pretti was.

A disturbing story began circulating across Facebook claiming Pretti had been fired from his nursing job months before his death because of allegations of inappropriate or predatory behavior toward patients.

There was just one major problem.

The story wasn't true.

Fact-checkers investigating the allegation found no evidence that Pretti had been fired for misconduct. Instead, evidence showed that he remained an ICU nurse at the Minneapolis VA Medical Center at the time of his death.

Even more troubling, investigators traced the false story not to a hospital, police report or legitimate American news organization, but to what fact-checkers described as a Vietnam-based network pumping AI-generated misinformation into American social media.

The ‘Viet Spam’ Connection

Lead Stories traced one version of the fabricated story to BuzzReport247.com and reported that it was promoted through Facebook pages managed from Vietnam.

The fact-checking organization calls this growing phenomenon “Viet Spam” — networks that use artificial intelligence, fake or misleading Facebook pages and sensational headlines to generate viral stories aimed largely at American and European audiences.

The formula is straightforward: manufacture an emotionally explosive story, attach it to a recognizable person or breaking news event, push it through social media and collect advertising revenue from people clicking the link.

In Pretti's case, the misinformation appeared almost immediately after his killing.

The fabricated article claimed that Pretti had worked at “Lakeshore Medical Center” and had been terminated following complaints from patients' families.

But Pretti didn't work there.

He worked at the Minneapolis VA Medical Center, caring for veterans in its intensive care unit.

The bogus story also quoted a supposed hospital executive named “Dr. Elena Vasquez.”

Fact-checkers found no evidence that this supposed executive had anything to do with Pretti's actual employer.

The false article couldn't even get Pretti's age right. It described him as 42. He was 37.

Pretti Was Still Working at the VA

Evidence from multiple independent sources directly contradicts the claim that Pretti had been fired.

The union representing federal employees identified Pretti as one of its members and an ICU nurse at the Minneapolis VA.

His colleagues described working with him there.

Patients described being treated by him.

A nursing student described spending months working alongside Pretti during a capstone preceptorship at the Minneapolis VA.

Pretti also held an active and unrestricted registered-nurse license at the time of his death, according to records reviewed by Lead Stories.

The Associated Press reported after his death that Pretti's father, Michael Pretti, described his son as a compassionate person who cared deeply about the American veterans he treated as an ICU nurse.

That is dramatically different from the portrait painted by the fabricated social-media stories.

A Fake Photograph Added to the Deception

The misinformation campaign went beyond fabricated allegations.

One viral version included a photograph supposedly depicting Pretti wearing a pink dress.

That wasn't Alex Pretti either.

Fact-checkers determined that the image appeared to be a digitally altered photograph of another person associated with the reality program “Fishtank Live.”

So the viral story had virtually every hallmark of manufactured internet misinformation: the wrong hospital, a nonexistent or falsely attributed executive, the wrong age, unsupported allegations and even a photograph of somebody else.

Yet it spread.

Pretti Was Killed by Border Patrol Agents

Pretti's death occurred during the Trump administration's immigration-enforcement operation in Minneapolis.

Although the incident has frequently been described online as an “ICE shooting,” the federal officers who fatally shot Pretti were associated with U.S. Customs and Border Protection, including Border Patrol, not ICE.

Pretti was a U.S. citizen.

According to reporting on the shooting, he was legally permitted to carry a handgun. Federal officials initially portrayed him as having threatened officers, but subsequent video evidence and reporting raised serious questions about those early descriptions of what happened.

A preliminary federal report obtained by the Minnesota Star Tribune said a Border Patrol agent and a Customs and Border Protection officer fired their weapons during the confrontation.

The report did not say that Pretti threatened officers with his firearm.

His family strongly disputed the government's early characterization of their son and said Pretti had been attempting to protect a woman during the confrontation.

A Man Dies — Then the Internet Reinvents Him

There is something particularly disturbing about what happened after Alex Pretti's death.

People were entitled to debate his actions, the actions of federal officers, immigration enforcement and the circumstances that led to the shooting.

But disagreement over a controversial police shooting does not justify inventing someone's history.

Pretti's employment record should be a matter of fact, not ideology.

Either he was fired for misconduct or he wasn't.

The available evidence overwhelmingly supports the latter.

Alex Pretti was not fired from the Minneapolis VA for sexual or inappropriate misconduct.

The viral allegations were fabricated.

Snopes rated the firing claim false. Lead Stories independently investigated similar allegations and concluded that the story originated with a Vietnam-based spam operation using AI-generated content.

The misinformation illustrates a much larger problem facing Americans.

Artificial intelligence has made producing convincing fake news extraordinarily cheap. Operators thousands of miles away can manufacture stories about American political controversies within hours, build Facebook pages that resemble news organizations and distribute those stories to an audience already angry enough to share first and ask questions later.

Alex Pretti became an example of the human consequences.

A 37-year-old ICU nurse was shot and killed by federal agents. His death was already controversial enough.

There was no need to invent another story about him.

Whatever Americans ultimately conclude about the circumstances surrounding Pretti's killing, that debate should begin with facts.

And one of those facts is now firmly established:

Alex Pretti was an ICU nurse caring for veterans at the Minneapolis VA Medical Center when he died. He had not been fired for misconduct. The viral story claiming otherwise was fake — and evidence traced its distribution to the Vietnam-based misinformation ecosystem fact-checkers have dubbed “Viet Spam.”

The Vietnam connection is particularly well documented by Lead Stories: it reported that Meta transparency information showed the Facebook page spreading one version was managed from Vietnam and described it as part of a broader AI-driven “Viet Spam” operation. Snopes separately rated the firing allegation false, while AP reporting identified Pretti as an ICU nurse at the Minneapolis VA at the time he was killed. 

Prosecutors Decline Felony Charges Against Jake Lang After Minneapolis Riot Arrest

  

MINNEAPOLIS  Hennepin County prosecutors have declined to file felony charges against far-right activist Jake Lang following his high-profile arrest during a Minneapolis rally, saying the available evidence did not provide a path to proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Lang, whose legal name is Edward Jacob Lang, was arrested Saturday after police said two vehicles connected to his group drove onto a sidewalk near Minneapolis City Hall and toward a crowd of counterprotesters. The incident led to multiple arrests and allegations of riot, assault and disorderly conduct.

In announcing the decision, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said prosecutors reviewed extensive evidence showing communication and logistical coordination between the Minneapolis Police Department and Lang’s security detail.

That evidence, Moriarty said, made it impossible to prove the intent required for felony charges beyond a reasonable doubt. The decision does not amount to a finding that Lang’s conduct was appropriate or harmless. Moriarty called his actions during the rally “despicable and disgusting,” while emphasizing that prosecutors must meet the legal burden of proof before bringing a felony case.

The county attorney’s decision does not prevent Minneapolis city prosecutors from considering misdemeanor or gross-misdemeanor charges arising from the incident. Lang also remains connected to other pending legal matters, including a felony vandalism case in neighboring St. Paul.

Meanwhile, a counterprotester who appeared at the rally wearing a Spider-Man costume has been charged with misdemeanor fifth-degree assault.

Nicholas William Love II, 33, was charged after video and photographs from the scene showed him climbing onto the pickup truck occupied by Lang and striking him during the confrontation. Love is accused, not convicted, and remains entitled to the presumption of innocence.

The contrasting legal outcomes have drawn attention to the chaotic confrontation outside City Hall, where police, Lang’s group and counterprotesters all became involved in a rapidly escalating clash. Prosecutors say their decision on Lang was based on what they could legally prove, not an endorsement of the rally or its conduct.

Jake Lang’s Minnesota Arrest Wasn’t “Activism.” It Was Criminal Conduct.

Jake Lang wants the public to believe his latest arrest in Minnesota was about free speech.

It wasn’t.

It was about criminal vandalism, carried out deliberately, filmed intentionally, and bragged about afterward by a man with a documented history of political violence and lawlessness.

On Thursday, Lang—a far-right influencer and pardoned January 6 insurrectionist—was arrested in St. Paul after he destroyed a sculpture on the steps of the Minnesota State Capitol. The artwork, installed earlier that same day, displayed the words “Prosecute ICE” and was placed by U.S. military veterans engaged in a lawful political protest.

Lang didn’t debate the message.
He didn’t organize a counter-demonstration.
He didn’t seek a permit.

He kicked the sculpture until it broke—and uploaded the footage himself.

Intent Was Never in Question

This was not a misunderstanding or a moment of anger. Lang’s own social media posts remove any ambiguity. He filmed the vandalism, shared it publicly, and later claimed he caused $6,000 in damage.

That is intent.
That is admission.
That is evidence.

Minnesota State Patrol arrested Lang shortly after the incident near Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and University Avenue. He was booked into the Ramsey County Jail on suspicion of criminal damage to property—an arrest that followed the facts, not politics.

A Pattern, Not an Isolated Incident

Lang is not a Minnesotan. He is a Florida-based political agitator whose national profile comes from his participation in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol—an event that resulted in injuries, deaths, and lasting damage to American democratic institutions.

His presence in Minnesota follows a familiar pattern:
• Travel to a new city
• Provoke confrontation
• Film the chaos
• Monetize the outrage

Just weeks ago, Lang led an anti-Islam rally in Minneapolis that drew a heavy counter-protest response. Now he has escalated from rhetoric to physical destruction of public property.

This is not activism.
It is disruption by design.

Free Speech Does Not Include Vandalism

The veterans who installed the sculpture exercised protected speech.
Lang did not.

The First Amendment does not protect kicking public art.
It does not protect destroying property on Capitol grounds.
It does not protect filming a crime and uploading it for attention.

Lang has since claimed he plans to hold a rally inside the Minnesota State Capitol—despite officials stating he does not have a permit to do so. That statement alone signals a continued disregard for the law and the rules governing public space.

Pardoned Does Not Mean Untouchable

A presidential pardon for January 6 does not grant lifelong immunity.
It does not authorize new crimes.
And it does not entitle anyone to treat state capitols as personal stages for vandalism.

Minnesota’s response was appropriate, restrained, and lawful:
He committed a crime.
He was arrested.
He was booked.

No martyrdom narrative changes that.

If Lang wanted to make a political argument, he had lawful options.
He chose destruction instead.

And this time, the consequences followed.

Civil Liberties Attorney Cites Supreme Court Precedent in Condemning ICE Shooting in Minnesota

MINNEAPOLIS Minnesota A fatal shooting involving federal immigration officers is under growing legal scrutiny after a civil liberties attorney cited longstanding Supreme Court precedent to dispute claims that the use of deadly force was justified.

Jenin Younes a former criminal defense attorney and current civil liberties lawyer issued a detailed public statement Tuesday after reviewing video footage of the incident multiple times from different angles and at varying speeds. Younes said she has no political interest in the outcome and emphasized that her conclusions are based solely on the law and the available evidence. She also stated she remains open to revising her opinion should new information emerge.

According to Younes the video shows Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers instigating the confrontation with a woman who was later shot and killed. She said the woman initially attempted to wave the officers past her vehicle and did not engage in threatening behavior.

Younes argued that ICE officers lacked lawful authority to detain search or arrest the woman who was a United States citizen. She noted that under federal law ICE agents have limited jurisdiction and generally may not seize citizens absent probable cause of a federal crime. She said no such probable cause has been articulated in this case.

She further stated that when officers without lawful authority surround a civilian particularly while masked and armed that person retains the constitutional right to avoid or escape an unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

Addressing the shooting itself Younes said the video shows the woman attempting to drive away rather than toward officers. She pointed out that the steering wheel was turned to the right and that an officer positioned near the front of the vehicle had time to move aside and was not directly in the vehicles path when shots were fired.

Younes cited the Supreme Court decision in Tennessee v Garner which held that law enforcement officers may not use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect unless the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses an immediate threat of serious physical harm or death. She said that standard was not met based on the video evidence.

She also referenced Graham v Connor which established that claims of excessive force must be analyzed under an objective reasonableness standard considering the totality of the circumstances. Younes said that standard weighs heavily against the officers actions given the lack of legal authority the absence of an immediate threat and the availability of less lethal alternatives.

Younes further noted that lower federal courts have repeatedly ruled that the use of a vehicle to flee from officers does not by itself justify deadly force unless the vehicle is being deliberately used as a weapon and poses an imminent danger at the moment force is applied.

Even if the officers involved had been local police Younes said the shooting would likely violate constitutional limits on the use of force. She argued that the involvement of federal immigration agents without general policing authority makes the incident more serious from a civil rights standpoint.

Younes expressed sympathy for the victims family particularly her children and criticized public figures and commentators who defended the shooting based on political disagreements with the victim. She said celebrating or excusing a death because of ideology reflects a breakdown of legal and moral principle.

Federal officials have stated that the agent fired in self defense alleging the vehicle was used as a weapon. Local officials and civil rights advocates have challenged that account citing video evidence and are calling for an independent investigation.

The Department of Homeland Security has said the incident remains under review. No criminal charges have been announced as of Tuesday night.

---