According to Bill Melugin, since the fatal shooting in Minnesota earlier this week, he has spoken with more than half a dozen federal officials involved in immigration enforcement, including several individuals in senior leadership roles.

These sources expressed growing unease and frustration with certain claims and narratives advanced by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the immediate aftermath of the incident.

Specifically, multiple sources said there is significant dissatisfaction with DHS officials publicly asserting that the individual who was killed, Alex Pretti, intended to carry out a “massacre” of federal agents or sought to inflict “maximum damage.”

The sources noted that these claims continued even after multiple videos surfaced that appear to contradict that narrative.

While the sources acknowledged that Pretti’s decision to arrive armed and involve himself in an active federal law enforcement operation was a serious error, they said there is no evidence indicating he intended to attack or kill officers.

According to available video footage, Pretti does not appear to have drawn his holstered firearm.

Several sources described DHS’s public messaging following the shooting as severely damaging from both a public relations and internal morale standpoint, warning that it has eroded trust and credibility.

Some compared the situation to prior instances in which federal messaging was widely criticized as misleading, saying the response has undermined confidence among both the public and rank-and-file personnel.

One source characterized DHS’s handling of the incident as “a case study in how not to conduct crisis communications.” Others expressed deep frustration, with one saying the agency’s response has worsened the situation, and another stating that DHS’s approach is costing the agency support and control of the broader narrative.

According to these officials, many believe the incident may ultimately be classified as a “bad shoot,” describing it as a rapidly unfolding, chaotic situation in which agents may have heard a warning of a firearm, followed by a possible accidental discharge after the weapon was disarmed, prompting officers to fire.

The sources emphasized that agents were forced to make split-second decisions without the benefit of multiple camera angles or hindsight analysis.

While all of the sources said they support the broader immigration enforcement and mass deportation agenda, they expressed serious concerns about how operations are being conducted and how incidents are communicated publicly.

Several also noted frustration that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is frequently blamed for actions taken by U.S. Border Patrol, which operates as a separate agency.

Melugin said he reached out to DHS for comment regarding concerns that the agency’s rhetoric and public statements have damaged its credibility.

In response, DHS provided the following statement to Fox News:

“We have seen a highly coordinated campaign of violence against our law enforcement. This individual committed a federal crime while armed as he obstructed an active law enforcement operation. As with any situation that is evolving, we work to give swift, accurate information to the American people as more information becomes available.”