WASHINGTON, DC — Legal immigrant Agnes Gibboney asked where was the protection for her son killed by an illegal alien as she stood in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office Wednesday.

Gibboney was one of many angel families turned away at Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office Wednesday despite their requests for meetings that were made ahead of their visit to her office.

“My parents legally immigrated here,” said angel mom Agnes Gibboney. “My parents wanted a good, safe place for my family and look and the safe place my only son, my first born was murdered.”

“Where is the protection?…Where is the sanctuary for my son?” Gibboney asked. “Who is to say that after this guy gets out next year, he’s not going to come after me or after any of my family? Or kill somebody else’s child?”

“I wouldn’t want to see that. I wouldn’t want his own family go through the hell I’ve been living with for almost 17 years,” she went on. “This is not fair.”

“This country, I took an oath when I became a citizen. Nancy Pelosi took an oath when she took office. She’s breaking her oath. She oughta be arrested,” said Gibboney. 

Capitol Hill Police showed up with a commanding presence while angel families were gathered in Pelosi’s office. Two of the officers entered the front office at one point, while several others stood at the ready outside the office where more angel families and supporters stood. Officers remained until angel families eventually departed the office.

Angel families held a press conference Wednesday with current and former elected officials, former heads of federal immigration law enforcement agencies, and other pro-border security groups. The families, who have had loved ones killed by illegal aliens, walked from their Capitol Hill event to Pelosi’s office. Several had requested meetings ahead of visiting Pelosi’s office, but received no response. Aides manning the front desks when angel families arrived would not give a timeline for when families could even meet with one of Pelosi’s staff.

Michelle Moons is a White House Correspondent for Breitbart News — follow on Twitter @MichelleDiana and Facebook

The unfitness of Rep. Ilhan Omar for the House Foreign Affairs Committee has already been brought up based on her persistent anti-Semitism, her strange habit of repeating Russian propaganda, and her apparent abuse of U.S. immigration law. Now a new and very big reason has come up: Her cringe-inducing ignorance of actual foreign affairs. 

In a hearing on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Omar got her big moment to show her foreign policy chops, and started in by misstating the actual name of the State Department’s grizzled old special envoy for Venezuela, the well-known Elliott Abrams, calling him ‘Adams.’ Then, sneering and smiling weirdly, she brought up a tangled political controversy Abrams had been involved in, the Iran-Contra scandal, dating from before she was born and cited that as proof Abrams could not be “truthful.” After insulting her witness, she then insolently refused to allow Abrams to reply, and Abrams, who comported himself very professionally, accurately called that an attack.

Here’s a perfectly curated tweet with video from Scott Johnson of Power Line:

 

While Rep. Ilhan Omar questioned Special Envoy for Venezuela Elliott Abrams in a House Foreign Affairs hearing, I got the eery feeling that Rep. Omar had no clue what the Iran-Contra Affair actually was. pic.twitter.com/cKDfYeCKeA

— Mike (@Doranimated) February 13, 2019

 

Mr. Adams [sic], in 1991 you pleaded guilty to two counts of withholding information from Congress regarding your involvement in the Iran-Contra affair, for which you were later pardoned by President H. W. Bush. I fail to understand why members of this committee or the American people any testimony that you give today to be truthful.

If she claimed he couldn’t be truthful and insisted the whole declaration ”was not a question,” why was she asking him anything at all? You don’t talk to people you don’t think are truthful, nobody does. But there she was, carrying on after that attack when she should have departed the scene immediately.

Next up, she brought up the El Salvador wars of 40 years ago, sounding as though this was a place she had just heard about. (Notice she wasn’t particularly interested in Venezuela, the topic of the hearing). Here’s her amateur-hour “question,” as recounted by the Daily Beast:

 She quoted Abrams as having said years ago that U.S. policy in El Salvador had been a success. “Do you think the massacre was a fabulous achievement,” she asked.

“That is a ridiculous question,” Abrams retorted. He noted that after the election of Napoleon Duarte as president, every government since has been democratically elected, and he considers that a success.

After that, she slid into Russian propaganda talking points, warning that Venezuela’s democrats were going to stage massacres and she wanted to know if he’d be happy about those. Seriously, that’s straight from Russian propaganda talking points, derived from its Ukraine war, and Moscow could only be smiling.

Here’s Breitbart’s story about it:

Rep. Omar went on to suggest that Abrams would “support an armed faction within Venezuela that engages in war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide” if he believed it would advance U.S interests, claiming that is what he did in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua.

“I am not going to respond to that question,” a seemingly annoyed Abrams replied when asked if he would support such an armed group.

So after all that ignorant crap about El Salvador, blaming the U.S. for some decades-old civil war crime it had nothing to do with, we finally get to her issue about Venezuela: The horrible danger from … Venezuela’s opposition. Never mind the starvation, never mind the people fleeing, never mind the ruined institutions, never mind the dining out on zoo animals. In Omar’s addled mind, the big risk in that country is … Venezuela’s democrats.

Nobody in Venezuela’s legitimate government, run by President Juan Guaido, is talking massacre – or even throwing Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro in jail, actually, which shows the extent of Omar’s ignorance. The thrust of the talks in Caracas is how to get him out of there, with some Venezuelans saying a comfortable exile would be acceptable just to get him out over the alternative of leaving him in. The whole democracy movement in Venezuela has been an incredibly peaceful one, with gargantuan crowds of people and Venezuelan-led. It’s been marked by a focus on urging Venezuela’s military to abandon Maduro and join them. And the reason for the uprising is very serious: Millions of Venezuelans are starving, dying of disease, or fleeing for their lives. Armed revolt talk is not just a smear on Venezuela’s already abused democrats, in a place where gun ownership is illegal and troops are crying out for weapons, it’s not even possible. What Omar was doing was smearing Venezuela’s democratic opposition – which has already been jailed, tortured, and beaten (one of the top four opposition leaders, Maria Corina Machado, had her nose broken in the Venezuela assembly by socialist thugs). She was also repeating Russian propaganda points derived from its invasion of eastern Ukraine.

I heard this bizarre exchange and could only conclude that Congress had descended into something out of an old V.S. Naipaul book. A third world goophead [Naipauls’ word] of partial education and substandard literacy, enamored of some third world ideology or other, brimming with pride and victimhood, goes into a confusion-and-resentment laced rant against the perceived wicked super-power of America, all the while desperately seeking its benefits (and in her case, power) on the side. 

The Daily Beast’s Ron Radosh had a superb summary of just why that’s a problem:

Omar’s comportment at the hearing, as well as her obvious belief that the United States is an imperialist and reactionary nation that by its very nature abuses human rights, should alone be reason enough to have her removed before she can do real damage.

The case is growing for throwing this unfit person off that committee. She doesn’t belong there, and as Radosh notes, the more she opens her mouth, the more she damages the Democrats. She should be thrown off and given her some Play-Doh with which to work her issues out. Not even Democrats can afford this kind of idiocy.

The unfitness of Rep. Ilhan Omar for the House Foreign Affairs Committee has already been brought up based on her persistent anti-Semitism, her strange habit of repeating Russian propaganda, and her apparent abuse of U.S. immigration law. Now a new and very big reason has come up: Her cringe-inducing ignorance of actual foreign affairs. 

In a hearing on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Omar got her big moment to show her foreign policy chops, and started in by misstating the actual name of the State Department’s grizzled old special envoy for Venezuela, the well-known Elliott Abrams, calling him ‘Adams.’ Then, sneering and smiling weirdly, she brought up a tangled political controversy Abrams had been involved in, the Iran-Contra scandal, dating from before she was born and cited that as proof Abrams could not be “truthful.” After insulting her witness, she then insolently refused to allow Abrams to reply, and Abrams, who comported himself very professionally, accurately called that an attack.

Here’s a perfectly curated tweet with video from Scott Johnson of Power Line:

 

While Rep. Ilhan Omar questioned Special Envoy for Venezuela Elliott Abrams in a House Foreign Affairs hearing, I got the eery feeling that Rep. Omar had no clue what the Iran-Contra Affair actually was. pic.twitter.com/cKDfYeCKeA

— Mike (@Doranimated) February 13, 2019

 

Mr. Adams [sic], in 1991 you pleaded guilty to two counts of withholding information from Congress regarding your involvement in the Iran-Contra affair, for which you were later pardoned by President H. W. Bush. I fail to understand why members of this committee or the American people any testimony that you give today to be truthful.

If she claimed he couldn’t be truthful and insisted the whole declaration ”was not a question,” why was she asking him anything at all? You don’t talk to people you don’t think are truthful, nobody does. But there she was, carrying on after that attack when she should have departed the scene immediately.

Next up, she brought up the El Salvador wars of 40 years ago, sounding as though this was a place she had just heard about. (Notice she wasn’t particularly interested in Venezuela, the topic of the hearing). Here’s her amateur-hour “question,” as recounted by the Daily Beast:

 She quoted Abrams as having said years ago that U.S. policy in El Salvador had been a success. “Do you think the massacre was a fabulous achievement,” she asked.

“That is a ridiculous question,” Abrams retorted. He noted that after the election of Napoleon Duarte as president, every government since has been democratically elected, and he considers that a success.

After that, she slid into Russian propaganda talking points, warning that Venezuela’s democrats were going to stage massacres and she wanted to know if he’d be happy about those. Seriously, that’s straight from Russian propaganda talking points, derived from its Ukraine war, and Moscow could only be smiling.

Here’s Breitbart’s story about it:

Rep. Omar went on to suggest that Abrams would “support an armed faction within Venezuela that engages in war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide” if he believed it would advance U.S interests, claiming that is what he did in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua.

“I am not going to respond to that question,” a seemingly annoyed Abrams replied when asked if he would support such an armed group.

So after all that ignorant crap about El Salvador, blaming the U.S. for some decades-old civil war crime it had nothing to do with, we finally get to her issue about Venezuela: The horrible danger from … Venezuela’s opposition. Never mind the starvation, never mind the people fleeing, never mind the ruined institutions, never mind the dining out on zoo animals. In Omar’s addled mind, the big risk in that country is … Venezuela’s democrats.

Nobody in Venezuela’s legitimate government, run by President Juan Guaido, is talking massacre – or even throwing Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro in jail, actually, which shows the extent of Omar’s ignorance. The thrust of the talks in Caracas is how to get him out of there, with some Venezuelans saying a comfortable exile would be acceptable just to get him out over the alternative of leaving him in. The whole democracy movement in Venezuela has been an incredibly peaceful one, with gargantuan crowds of people and Venezuelan-led. It’s been marked by a focus on urging Venezuela’s military to abandon Maduro and join them. And the reason for the uprising is very serious: Millions of Venezuelans are starving, dying of disease, or fleeing for their lives. Armed revolt talk is not just a smear on Venezuela’s already abused democrats, in a place where gun ownership is illegal and troops are crying out for weapons, it’s not even possible. What Omar was doing was smearing Venezuela’s democratic opposition – which has already been jailed, tortured, and beaten (one of the top four opposition leaders, Maria Corina Machado, had her nose broken in the Venezuela assembly by socialist thugs). She was also repeating Russian propaganda points derived from its invasion of eastern Ukraine.

I heard this bizarre exchange and could only conclude that Congress had descended into something out of an old V.S. Naipaul book. A third world goophead [Naipauls’ word] of partial education and substandard literacy, enamored of some third world ideology or other, brimming with pride and victimhood, goes into a confusion-and-resentment laced rant against the perceived wicked super-power of America, all the while desperately seeking its benefits (and in her case, power) on the side. 

The Daily Beast’s Ron Radosh had a superb summary of just why that’s a problem:

Omar’s comportment at the hearing, as well as her obvious belief that the United States is an imperialist and reactionary nation that by its very nature abuses human rights, should alone be reason enough to have her removed before she can do real damage.

The case is growing for throwing this unfit person off that committee. She doesn’t belong there, and as Radosh notes, the more she opens her mouth, the more she damages the Democrats. She should be thrown off and given her some Play-Doh with which to work her issues out. Not even Democrats can afford this kind of idiocy.

Tired of the empty rhetoric about school safety, one charter school in Florida has decided it’s time to bring in the big guns, literally, to protect its students from threats. Palmetto’s Manatee School for Arts has just hired two combat veterans — whom they’ve armed with semi-automatic rifles and handguns — to, as the principal put it, “put down” anyone who comes on campus intending to do harm.

In a move reported by the Bradenton Herald, Manatee School for Arts Principal Bill Jones explained that his school is not interested in trying to “talk” or “negotiate” with potential threats — they’re just going to take them out.

“If someone walks onto this campus, they’re going to be shot and killed,” Jones told the paper. “We’re not going to talk with them. We’re not going to negotiate. We are going to put them down, as quickly as possible.”

The Herald notes that the Public Safety Act enacted in 2018 in response to the horrific mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School requires all public schools in the state to have armed security personnel on campus. While many schools have lawmen assigned to the schools as resource officers, the new law allows for some alternatives. Being a charter school, Manatee has even more leeway for who it uses for security — and how it chooses to arm them.

“Manatee School for the Arts, which has more leeway than regular public schools, has taken a more aggressive approach to the guardian program, hiring only military veterans with combat experience and arming them with Glock handguns and Kel-Tec RDB 17-inch semi-automatic long-guns, both which they carry at all times,” the Herald reports. “The rifle is a bullpup, a configuration that allows for a shorter firearm with a long barrel, and uses .223 caliber ammunition, same as an AR-15.”

Principal Jones stressed that while there’s “no guarantee” the officers will be where they’re needed at a particular moment, “certainly, the long gun gives you a better range.”

“People might think twice, particularly in our case, if you pull up and see a guy who is carrying a full-long gun,” said Jones. “If someone tried to come on campus with a weapon, before we had our guardian program, there really is nothing much to stop that.”

The choice of using only military veterans and allowing them to carry their semi-automatic rifles has gained national attention, including from CBS Miami. While many schools do provide security personnel rifles, they do not carry them; instead, the rifles are usually stored in security racks in their vehicles.

The administration has also mandated that the guardians use ammo for the long-guns that does not “over-penetrate,” specifying shells that will pierce basic body armor but not go through the intruder, which would pose a risk to others.

Jones also addressed the school’s decision to hire only combat veterans. “If you’re ever going to have an event on campus, I don’t want it to be the first time they’ve been shot at,” he told the Herald. “I don’t want them trying to figure who they are and how they are going to respond. That’s a life-changing experience and these folks, I don’t want this to be the first time they’ve asked themselves, ‘What am I going to do?'”

Broward County’s response to the Parkland mass shooting last February has been widely condemned because of the failure of security personnel to confront the shooter, which almost certainly resulted in more lives lost.

The Herald reports that the first guardian hired by the school is “a 15-year U.S. Army veteran who served three tours in Afghanistan and Iraq,” while the second “is currently undergoing required training by the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office.”

Related: Sun Sentinel: Here’s Why We Now Agree With Republicans That Broward Sheriff Scott Israel Should Be Removed

Do you support Sen. Cruz’s “El Chapo Act”?