Jerry Cantrell @ Town Ballroom

Immigration agents across the country are quietly rebelling against the Trump administration after being thrust into what they describe as a “no-win situation” following the killing of Minneapolis ICU nurse Alex Pretti, according to a report by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein. Agents told Klippenstein they are furious over what they see as a politically driven “information war” from Washington, rejecting officials’ rush to brand Pretti a “domestic terrorist” despite video evidence showing he was unarmed when shot repeatedly. The administration’s aggressive damage-control narrative has fueled paranoia, fear of retaliation, and deep internal dissent, with some agents openly questioning leadership and even calling for a pullout from Minnesota as confidence in DHS leadership collapses.

Watch the video below.

Trump immigration agents revolt after Pretti killing sparks internal backlash Trump immigration agents revolt after Pretti killing sparks internal backlash

A hearing room for the House Oversight Committee erupted into laughter Wednesday after the committee chair, Rep. James Comer (R-KY), blanked on a question asked by a Democratic committee member.

Wednesday’s hearing saw the committee fiercely debate whether to hold Bill and Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress for defying a congressional subpoena to testify about their connections to Jeffrey Epstein and his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. Challenging the measure was Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM), who pressed Comer on whether the committee had already been informed that the Clintons were willing to testify on the record.

“It's my understanding that you guys have received correspondence by phone, email and a written letter from the attorneys from the Clintons offering to [testify] on the record, with you, with the staff... is that correct?” Stansbury asked.

“I didn't... I wasn't paying attention to your question,” Comer admitted, sparking an eruption of laughter in the room, including from Stansbury, who moved to ask her question again, albeit more slowly.

“Okay – we're pursuant to a motion you brought for contempt, and the claim is that you have made reasonable accommodations and that [the Clintons] have not been responsive,” Stansbury repeated.

“But they have transmitted correspondence to all of the members of the committee – including yourself – including a letter from their attorneys stating that they have offered by phone, by email to meet with you, on the record, to give sworn statements. Is that correct?”

Comer’s first reaction was to speak of how the Clintons had been given “five months” to appear before Congress before being pressed by Stansbury again: “yes or no,” she asked.

“You all are trying to create a false narrative!” Comer fired back. “You've had five months, you should have gotten to the Clintons before the contempt vote!”

Stansbury asked once more for Comer to answer her question, but was met with silence as Comer’s aides could be seen speaking with him quietly.

“Just to be clear for the public, his staff are advising the chairman to not answer that question,” Stansbury alleged.

Comer fired back at Stansbury once more.

“No, the staff said they couldn't understand what the hell you were saying because you blabbered for three minutes!” Comer said.