We could use some judicial ethics

It'll never happen.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

America's brutal destruction of Afghanistan

Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., secured a vote Thursday on President Joe Biden’s refusal to release to the Afghan central bank $9.4 billion of its own foreign reserves. It marked the first-ever vote on the White House’s lethal policy of asset denial that’s causing the displacement, starvation, and death of millions of Afghans.

[...]

Jayapal’s provision, drafted with Rep. Jesús García, D-Ill., would require the secretary of the Treasury to provide Congress with an assessment of the humanitarian suffering caused by U.S. sanctions on Afghanistan and its confiscation of the country’s foreign-held money.

[...]

As the Taliban neared Kabul last summer, Secretary of State Tony Blinken blocked the outflow of Afghanistan’s foreign currency reserves, and he hasn’t lifted a finger since then. The U.S. had spent nearly 20 years building an Afghan central banking system that was independent of the government and, despite fearmongering by a number of Democrats and Republicans, still operates without interference from the Taliban.

“These are not American taxpayer funds,” said Shah Mehrabi, a member of the central bank’s board and a professor of economics at Montgomery College, arguing for the release of Afghanistan’s reserves. “People are under the illusion that these are United States funds. These funds belong to Afghanistan. ."

[...]

Jayapal introduced her measure as an amendment to a gigantic anti-China bill that would subsidize the U.S. semiconductor and other industries with hundreds of billions of dollars and ratchet up military activities in the Indo-Pacific region. The House of Representatives passed the legislation — called the America Creating Opportunities for Manufacturing, Pre-Eminence in Technology and Economic Strength, or COMPETES, Act — on Friday. But the House rejected Jayapal’s amendment with 175 yes and 255 no votes, as 44 Democrats joined Republicans against the measure.

  The Intercept

Of course. Actually, I'm surprised it got 175 yes votes.

If you missed it, check out this Bulwark interview with George Packer, and/or read his Atlantic article: The Betrayal.

Another House member contracts Covid after Capitol lockdown

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) announced early Tuesday that she has tested positive for the coronavirus after being locked down with Republicans who "cruelly refused to wear a mask" during rioting by President Trump's supporters at the U.S. Capitol.

"I just received a positive COVID-19 test result after being locked down in a secured room at the Capitol where several Republicans not only cruelly refused to wear a mask but recklessly mocked colleagues and staff who offered them one," Jayapal said on Twitter.

[...]

News of Jayapal's diagnosis came just hours after Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.) also said she had tested positive for the virus, citing similar concerns about time spent hunkered down with Republicans who were not wearing masks.

  The Hill

I've seen video of that. And those assholes should be charged with reckless endangerment. 

I'm guessing the Republican response will be:  See? Masks don't work, since both of those who contracted Covid were wearing masks.

 ...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:

• 
  
  
  
  

Moving on impeachment

Three months ago, Special Counsel Robert Mueller completed his investigation into Russian election interference and President Donald Trump’s obstruction of justice. When the redacted report finally became available to Congress and the American people, it painted a damning picture of a corrupt president who welcomed and encouraged an attack on our country, capitalized on it, and then tried to cover up what he had done.

[...]

Congress has patiently tried to work within traditional means to get to the bottom of this extraordinary situation. Committees have called witnesses and requested evidence, only to be stonewalled by Trump and his associates. The president’s refusal to comply with the Constitution, statutes, and established congressional oversight defies the rule of law.

Mueller’s testimony before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees was a watershed moment. At this point, it is up to Congress to act on the evidence of multiple counts of obstruction of justice committed by the president, and to continue our investigation into whether he has committed other high crimes and misdemeanors.

[...]

We have now filed a petition in court to obtain the grand-jury documents referenced in the special counsel’s report. In that filing, we have made clear that we will utilize our Article I powers to obtain the additional underlying evidence, as well as enforce subpoenas for key witness testimony, and broaden our investigations to include conflicts of interest and financial misconduct.

While many people believe that beginning an impeachment investigation can begin only with a vote of the full House of Representatives, this is not true. Article I authorizes the House Judiciary Committee to begin this process.

As members of the House Judiciary Committee, we understand the gravity of this moment that we find ourselves in. We wake up every morning with the understanding of the oath that binds us as members of Congress, and the trust that our constituents placed in us to uphold that oath. We will move forward with the impeachment process.

  The Atlantic

At least they're calling it an impeachment process now.  They're not shying away from the word.

Our investigation will seriously examine all the evidence as we consider whether to bring articles of impeachment or other remedies under our Article I powers.

Our Constitution requires it. Our democracy depends on it.

Nadler made the announcement: