Elizabeth Bennett
@elizabethbennettjd.bsky.social
Old-timey congressional staff, herder of regulations and writer.
Medicaid does not require that. In my short experience with Medicaid, it was in fact the most efficiently run, best “insurance” I’d encountered in a lifetime of government employee and private health insurance. Americans would be lucky to have it.
December 11, 2025 at 1:35 AM
Medicaid does not require that. In my short experience with Medicaid, it was in fact the most efficiently run, best “insurance” I’d encountered in a lifetime of government employee and private health insurance. Americans would be lucky to have it.
Tell that to not-President Kamala Harris.
December 11, 2025 at 12:39 AM
Tell that to not-President Kamala Harris.
Yeah—they’re spending billions to not be able to figure that out which makes them utterly incompetent.
Or complicit.
Or complicit.
December 11, 2025 at 12:34 AM
Yeah—they’re spending billions to not be able to figure that out which makes them utterly incompetent.
Or complicit.
Or complicit.
Me too. I’m also worried about Talarico. I’ve felt for years that he’s an important talent for THIS moment and we need him in Congress. He speaks their language and eviscerates them with a loving smile.
December 9, 2025 at 3:56 PM
Me too. I’m also worried about Talarico. I’ve felt for years that he’s an important talent for THIS moment and we need him in Congress. He speaks their language and eviscerates them with a loving smile.
You’re confusing capability with willingness.
They are fully capable of stopping this tyranny. They just don’t want to.
They are fully capable of stopping this tyranny. They just don’t want to.
December 9, 2025 at 3:51 PM
You’re confusing capability with willingness.
They are fully capable of stopping this tyranny. They just don’t want to.
They are fully capable of stopping this tyranny. They just don’t want to.
People from that hemisphere sure play a long game.
December 8, 2025 at 10:43 PM
People from that hemisphere sure play a long game.
That’s not what he said in the speech—did you watch it? People read the blurb about it and ran, but that’s not what he was saying. I’d encourage you to go back and watch that clip so you don’t feed that disinformation.
December 8, 2025 at 1:44 AM
That’s not what he said in the speech—did you watch it? People read the blurb about it and ran, but that’s not what he was saying. I’d encourage you to go back and watch that clip so you don’t feed that disinformation.
Was Logan’s Run not the best show ever?
December 8, 2025 at 1:19 AM
Was Logan’s Run not the best show ever?
These processes are *political*. You might want to think about the other political implications of an impeachment, some that might affect the *next* election.
Or don’t. You people have no imagination, no fight, no understanding of legal principles but the nerve to call others stupid. Its absurd.
Or don’t. You people have no imagination, no fight, no understanding of legal principles but the nerve to call others stupid. Its absurd.
December 7, 2025 at 7:56 PM
These processes are *political*. You might want to think about the other political implications of an impeachment, some that might affect the *next* election.
Or don’t. You people have no imagination, no fight, no understanding of legal principles but the nerve to call others stupid. Its absurd.
Or don’t. You people have no imagination, no fight, no understanding of legal principles but the nerve to call others stupid. Its absurd.
Why don’t you think about strategies of bringing impeachment articles that don’t include passage? Start with looking up the legal concept of acquiescence and considering how the less informed electorate is viewing all these crimes while Dems say and do nothing about them. I’ll wait. Or, f*ck off.
December 7, 2025 at 7:30 PM
Why don’t you think about strategies of bringing impeachment articles that don’t include passage? Start with looking up the legal concept of acquiescence and considering how the less informed electorate is viewing all these crimes while Dems say and do nothing about them. I’ll wait. Or, f*ck off.
We all had to go get a goddamned Real ID, the who,e point of which is to conclusively prove our citizenship and identity.
Why isn’t that sufficient?
Why isn’t that sufficient?
December 7, 2025 at 7:05 PM
We all had to go get a goddamned Real ID, the who,e point of which is to conclusively prove our citizenship and identity.
Why isn’t that sufficient?
Why isn’t that sufficient?
Did your staff not brief you, or are you lying to avoid commenting on an uncomfortable topic? Do you expect us to believe that you genuinely aren’t aware of this issue? This strategy of “I don’t know” is rampant through the ruling party—whose idea was it, and do you feel like it’s fair to Americans?
December 7, 2025 at 7:02 PM
Did your staff not brief you, or are you lying to avoid commenting on an uncomfortable topic? Do you expect us to believe that you genuinely aren’t aware of this issue? This strategy of “I don’t know” is rampant through the ruling party—whose idea was it, and do you feel like it’s fair to Americans?
Do you people know how politics and law work?
Obviously not.
Obviously not.
December 7, 2025 at 6:51 PM
Do you people know how politics and law work?
Obviously not.
Obviously not.
In middle school, I always had my bday parties there.
December 7, 2025 at 6:29 PM
In middle school, I always had my bday parties there.
Houston is easily the best food city in the US, possibly the world.
December 7, 2025 at 5:00 PM
Houston is easily the best food city in the US, possibly the world.
Even if you argue, “the Bible says it” or “the Constitution says it,” you have to cite the clause then *actually make an argument*.
Simply saying “the Constitution says I have right to privacy” or whatever is insufficient grounds for basing a conclusion.
Simply saying “the Constitution says I have right to privacy” or whatever is insufficient grounds for basing a conclusion.
December 7, 2025 at 2:35 PM
Even if you argue, “the Bible says it” or “the Constitution says it,” you have to cite the clause then *actually make an argument*.
Simply saying “the Constitution says I have right to privacy” or whatever is insufficient grounds for basing a conclusion.
Simply saying “the Constitution says I have right to privacy” or whatever is insufficient grounds for basing a conclusion.
Clearly you don’t know how politics work.
December 7, 2025 at 12:56 PM
Clearly you don’t know how politics work.
Passage is the only reason to take the vote.
Critical thought is not your strong suit.
We’re done here.
Critical thought is not your strong suit.
We’re done here.
December 7, 2025 at 12:37 PM
Passage is the only reason to take the vote.
Critical thought is not your strong suit.
We’re done here.
Critical thought is not your strong suit.
We’re done here.
10 Republicans voted for his second impeachment, and it would take fewer than that this time while Trump is actively criming and disappearing people.
Meanwhile, while Dems AREN’T impeaching, they’re acquiescing to his crimes. That’s a legal term. Look it up.
Meanwhile, while Dems AREN’T impeaching, they’re acquiescing to his crimes. That’s a legal term. Look it up.
December 7, 2025 at 11:36 AM
10 Republicans voted for his second impeachment, and it would take fewer than that this time while Trump is actively criming and disappearing people.
Meanwhile, while Dems AREN’T impeaching, they’re acquiescing to his crimes. That’s a legal term. Look it up.
Meanwhile, while Dems AREN’T impeaching, they’re acquiescing to his crimes. That’s a legal term. Look it up.
You’re right. Doing f*ck all has been a far more productive use of Dems’ time, and that’ll play great in midterm ads. Lazy Americans w/o the capacity for critical thought like you seem perfectly comfortable with their new fascist overlords.
December 7, 2025 at 1:00 AM
You’re right. Doing f*ck all has been a far more productive use of Dems’ time, and that’ll play great in midterm ads. Lazy Americans w/o the capacity for critical thought like you seem perfectly comfortable with their new fascist overlords.