Three Democratic members of Congress have tested positive for COVID-19, and they all have pointed to a day spent locked down with colleagues who refused to wear masks as a likely point of contraction.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) put out a scathing statement Tuesday after her positive diagnosis, stating that “anyone who refuses to wear a mask should be fully held accountable for endangering our lives because of their selfish idiocy.”
She also called for “serious fines … on every single Member who refuses to wear a mask in the Capitol,” and said the sergeant-at-arms should immediately remove any member from the floor who won’t comply.
Reps. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.) have also tested positive.
“I was forced to spend several hours in a secure but confined location with dozens of other Members of Congress. Several Republican lawmakers in the room adamantly refused to wear a mask,” Schneider said Tuesday.
“Following the events of Wednesday, including sheltering with several colleagues who refused to wear masks, I decided to take a Covid test. I have tested positive,” Watson Coleman tweeted Monday.
When a mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters overtook the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, officials rushed a number of lawmakers, reporters and staffers into a protected, undisclosed location.
More than 100 people were in the room together for as long as several hours, a source who was there told HuffPost.
At least nine Republican House members were not wearing masks for extended periods of time, according to the source, as well as video of the lawmakers. They included:
Andy Biggs (Ariz.)
Mo Brooks (Ala.)
Michael Cloud (Texas)
Matt Gaetz (Fla.)
Paul Gosar (Ariz.)
Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.)
Doug LaMalfa (Calif.)
Markwayne Mullin (Okla.)
Scott Perry (Pa.)
Punchbowl News published video Friday showing Biggs, Cloud, Greene, LaMalfa, Mullin and Perry in the room, refusing to wear masks offered by Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.).
“I’m not trying to get political here,” Mullin said.
“Congresswoman Greene is a healthy adult who tested negative for COVID at the White House on 1/4,” a Greene spokesperson told HuffPost. “She does not believe healthy Americans should be forced to muzzle themselves with a mask. America needs to reopen and get back to normal.”
Greene is a backer of the QAnon conspiracy theory that asserts Trump is fighting a “deep state” cabal of child traffickers. She has made videos promoting racist, anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim views.
Mark Spannagel, LaMalfa’s chief of staff, did not comment on LaMalfa’s lack of a mask. Instead, he blamed Democrats for the leak of the video to Punchbowl News, and criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for allowing members who had tested positive for COVID-19 to vote in person for the speaker election.
“Given that Speaker Pelosi pressured Covid positive Democrats to come to Washington and put them in the House Chambers to ensure her election as Speaker, Democrats should take a long look at the hypocrisy of their caucus before attacking Republicans,” Spannagel said. “Sending out video of the one of the Capitol’s ‘undisclosed locations’ that could easily be identified by those knowledgeable of the rooms just endangers everyone if it were needed next time. All to satisfy the need for partisan grandstanding.”
The other lawmakers did not respond to requests for comment.
Blunt Rochester told CNN that she was “very concerned we were sitting in a super-spreader event, but instead of sitting back and lamenting, I tried to go into action to try and persuade people” to put masks on.
The House sergeant-at-arms also reminded members that they were in close quarters and it was important to wear masks, a suggestion that Democrats applauded.
Many of the maskless Republicans were congregated together, and Democrats tried to stay away from that corner of the room.
Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) tweeted that she simply left because she didn’t want to be stuck with the GOP members.
Congress’ attending physician, Brian Monahan, sent a letter to lawmakers on Sunday, warning them that someone in the room that day may have been infected with the coronavirus.
“The time in this room was several hours for some and briefer for others. During this time, individuals may have been exposed to another occupant with coronavirus infection,” the email read. “Please continue your usual daily coronavirus risk reduction measures (daily symptom inventory checklist, mask wear, and social distancing). Additionally, individuals should obtain an RT-PCR coronavirus test next week as a precaution.”
Two other GOP lawmakers, Rep. Jake LaTurner (Kan.) and Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (Tenn.), have also tested positive for COVID-19 since the Jan. 6 siege, but both told The Washington Post they were not in the secured room that day.
Just one day after the right-wing riot at the Capitol, the United States hit a grim milestone: the deadliest day of the pandemic thus far, with more than 4,000 deaths.
This piece has been updated with two additional lawmakers who have tested positive after Jan. 6.
Related...
House Lawmakers Possibly Exposed To COVID-19 Under Lockdown
Records Prove The Obvious: Fervent Trump Fans Fueled The Capitol Siege
Democratic Lawmaker Tests Positive For COVID-19 After Capitol Attack
This article originally appeared on HuffPost and has been updated.
Legal Theory For Dealing With Insurrection
Because the 9 maskless MAGAts who may have infected Americans are insurrectionists and the command and control that aided and encouraged enemy combatants to storm of the capital building, they too are enemy combatants and saboteurs. They therefore have no protection under American law or the Geneva convention. It could be argued that anyone who took the oath to defend the United States Constitution is obligated to capture or neutralize MAGAts according to their best judgement.
These anti-mask MAGAts knowingly placed Americans in even greater danger during the MAGAt's siege of the Capitol building.
Being that COVID-19 is as deadly as a knife attack the member of Congress that these 9 maskless MAGAts exposed would be legally within their rights to use deadly force on them. Dead MAGAts can't spread the virus. (deaths from knife attacks are 4% and 25% from gunshots)
These enemies would not be entitled to trials in US criminal courts of law. They probably should face military tribunals.
Enemy Combatant:
Captured fighter in a war who is not entitled to prisoner of war status because he or she does not meet the definition of a lawful combatant as established by the geneva convention; a saboteur.They have declared war on the United States and they have attacked.
Commanders of military forces are even more culpable than their foot soldiers.
The U.S. war against Terrorism that began after the September 11, 2001, attacks led to the invasion of Afghanistan, the toppling of the Taliban regime, and the aggressive dismantling of al-Qaeda terrorist strongholds within that country. Although many Taliban soldiers were released after the conclusion of the conflict, the United States took into custody over five hundred individuals they labeled enemy combatants. This designation, which is also referred to as unlawful combatants, gives detainees fewer rights than those conferred on prisoners of war by the Third Geneva Convention (1949).
According to the articles of the convention, a lawful combatant must be part of an organized command structure; wear openly visible emblems to identify themselves as non-civilians; carry arms out in the open; and respect the Rules of War, which would include not taking hostages. President george w. bush and his administration maintained that the five hundred detainees did not meet these criteria. Therefore, they could be tried for crimes by military tribunals; moreover, the individuals could be held incommunicado for as long as the war lasted, with no access to the U.S. legal system. The confinement of these prisoners at Camp X-Ray at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, raised questions about the U.S. government's interpretation of enemy combatant status. The fact that two detainees were U.S. citizens complicated matters, as both sought to use the U.S. courts to gain their freedom.
During the last months of 2001, the United States took into custody suspected al-Qaeda terrorists. These detainees included Afghan nationals, Pakistanis, Saudis, Yemenis, and others from different parts of the world. Members of the U.S. military screened and interrogated detainees to identify persons who might be prosecuted or detained, or who might have useful information about the terrorist network. In January 2002, 482 of these detainees were flown to Cuba, where they were incarcerated at Camp X-Ray. The conditions were at best spartan, which drew criticism from Human Rights organizations. Over time the United States upgraded the facilities and by early 2003, a small number of detainees had been returned to their country of origin, having satisfied U.S. officials that they had no terrorist ties.
One detainee, Yaser Esam Hamdi, informed his captors that he had been born in the United States before his family returned to the Middle East. This information led the U.S. military to transfer Hamdi from Camp X-Ray to the Norfolk, Virginia, Naval Station in early 2002. His father filed a Habeas Corpus petition (a legal writ that requires a person be brought before a court) in the U.S. District Court of Virginia, demanding that the government release his son. The district court judge ruled that Hamdi had the right to see an attorney, and the court appointed a public defender to represent him. The Defense Department, however, challenged the ruling, declaring that Hamdi, as an enemy combatant, did not have the Right to Counsel. The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed and reversed the order. Nevertheless, the district court still raised doubts whether Hamdi, as a U.S. citizen, could be held as an enemy combatant. The Fourth Circuit finally settled the matter in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 316 F.3d 450 (4th Cir. 2003), when it ruled that a U.S. citizen captured with enemy forces during a combat operation in a foreign country could be held as an enemy combatant.
Another detainee raised objections in federal court about his enemy combatant status. In May 2002, Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen, was arrested in Chicago as he disembarked from a flight from Pakistan. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that Padilla was a "dirty bomber," an al-Qaeda terrorist trained to make and explode a low-grade nuclear device. He was arrested under a judicial warrant, which made it necessary for him to make a court appearance. A lawyer was appointed to represent Padilla, but then the U.S. government changed its mind. It informed the judge that Padilla had been classified as an enemy combatant in a military order signed by President Bush. Confined to military custody in a South Carolina brig, Padilla's requests to see his lawyer were refused. This led to a series of hearings and orders in which the U.S. district court judge in New York urged the government to relent and let Padilla consult with his attorney. In December 2002, the judge issued an order directing the government to allow attorney visits (Padilla ex rel, Newman v. Bush, 233 F.Supp.2d 564 [S.D.N.Y.2002]). The government continued to object, leading the judge, in April 2003, to finalize his order so the government could appeal the issue.
