DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus CNBC's Jim Cramer: These are the best jobs numbers of our lives

Can you imagine Trump ever coming into a common man's home and sitting down breaking bread? lmao... nope.

A lot of us wouldn't permit it anyway. I have a certain level of common decency I expect from the people who I invite into my home. With everything i know about Trump to this point, he certainly doesn't meet that threshold.

Preaching to the choir.

They're not trying him for lack of family values. They'd actually have solid evidence for the charge at least.

It's kind of a we can't prove murder, so we're going to try to manufacture something else on him feel.

Doesn't mean he's not a criminal.

They just need to find something that will stick.

I'm sure it's out there. I just don't think they've presented it yet.

Lots of circumstancial, open to interpretation talk.

The interpretation could go against Trump, but with the construction of the Senate and the Supreme Court, I'd like the case to be more concrete.

I'm "the DA" that would love to prosecute him, but I need a better case brought to me.

I've never voted for him, so stop trying to put me in the "moral majority" crowd.

More Right Wing talking points about there being no crime.

It's been laid out in black and white with testimony by enough credible and highly reputable witnesses under oath - we have the WH hiding evidence and refusing to let witnesses testify. They found "something that will stick" - it's bribing a foreign government to launch (or announce) an investigation into his political rival.

Yes he's a despicable pathological liar and a horrible 'family man' - but that's not why he is being impeached. He's being impeached on his actions with Ukraine and the EVIDENCE. It's really, really, really simple.

It's so simple and black and white that all the Trump brigade aren't refuting any of the evidence. . . they are talking about procedure and lack of a crime because Ukrain (eventually) got it's funds. smh.

If that's true, why is nancy holding the articles of impeachment until she gets the senate to do it her way?

Oh, yeah, it isn't as you say.

McConnell and Co aren’t willing to hold a fair trial. You understand this, right?

Don’t bring up the “well, they didn’t allow...” nonsense. They followed the rules set for private hearings made with BENGHAZI!!!!!!! hearings.

Just admit you can’t deal with facts.

He’s made over 10+ acts of obstruction of justice and withheld defensive financial assistance due to a fear of a centrist beating him.

Precious. I deal with facts every day.

Here's a fact you ignore: Impeachment articles are written and voted on by the house. Period. If passed, they are sent on to the senate for a trial. Period.

What's Benghazi have to do with the house's 2 articles of impeachment anyway? ????? What?

Oh, and if he's made over 10 acts of obstruction of justice (which, by the way, if you knew facts you'd know he wasn't charged with any 'obstruction of justice" crimes in impeachment)............why wasn't he charged with them?

He got charged with obstruction of congress. And in a partisan vote, they nailed him. Let that charge/impeachment go to the senate, as it's supposed to.

OH...........nancy won't allow that.

"Centrist"?

Like the house was fair?

I have no idea what Nancy is up to .... I do know that it's straight forward. Maybe, just a guess, becuase the spineless GOP sold their souls in the Senate and will not impeach Trump, maybe that plays a part? I don't know.

But I do notice that instead of refuting the evidence against Trump you are reverting to procedure. Thanks for verifying.

Uh...................look at the house, Thanks. They could've taken the vote 3 years ago and the results would've been the same. I'm sorry people got butt hurt over a fair election that their girl didn't win.

Send the damn articles of impeachment to the senate.

Lol. Another deflection. Damn, you have a new one every freaking hour.

Hillary-larious !!!!

For outsiders, read that as: Damn, he's got a point I can't contradict, so I'll attack him personally.

Poor poor arch, always being attached personally... smh GOPer pity parties.

Your desire to help anyone is counterproductive to your partisan affiliations. Just sayin.

Because there is a Republican majority, and they've already admitted they will not hold a fair trial. Their words, not mine.

Also, as far as holding in to it, both parties do the same. They delayed Supreme Court appointments until they had majority that would approve them.

Also, why aren't they letting witnesses testify, and then claiming no one will testify?

See what happens when you engage in the whataboutisms and deflection.

The original side discussion was about how black and white the witness testimony is along with a partial (cleaned up and sanitized) version of the call report - Trump tried to blackmail/bribe/coerce a foreign Govt so as to attack his political rival. That coupled with the WH preventing witness testimony and not responding to subpoenas - it's a slam dunk.

Instead of talking about all that evidence - What we have now is deflection and discussion about the Republicans in the house, Nancy and what she is going to do, "Process", a throw back to refer to the election result 3 years ago (good grief), Biden and what he did while carrying out official US policy.

It's the deflection game - it's all they have. And instead of engaging, better to just keep bringing it back to Trump, what he did and what he said and what all the closest officials around the situation all testified to. . . . Sure they don't like that and accuse you of not having anything when you don't let them change the subject .... but that's because they can't and won't address the actual issue. If they do they lose.

So how do you feel about people who take a legal oath under God while openly admitting they will break that oath? Does that even mean anything to you anymore?

or did it ever?

I retired. I now work two jobs to supplement my SS income.

When you say "people" are having to work 2 to 3 jobs to make ends meet, this is simply not true. Show me the data. I only work one job by the way, its highly skilled so there's no reason to work multiple jobs for me. If someone is working more than one job I suggest they better their skills. It may sound mean but thems the breaks. If you don't study or learn a trade worth working for you'll always be living off multiple jobs.

Where were you 8 years, 15, 20, 35, 40 years ago about the debt and deficit? You do realize what has been happening under all the past administrations right? I can assure you if you want the debt to go down the answer is most certainly not to grow the government or make it larger but I believe that's what you advocate for, that is a contradiction.

At the end of the day I just think you're economically illiterate. It sounds like you've never taken any classes in economics. You need to go to school ASAP.

Nearly 1 in 3 American workers with a side hustle still struggle to make ends meet

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/06/nearly-1...-ends-meet.html

Show me the data it’s not true. Many of the people I know work two or three jobs. Do you really think they want to? They have to.

It is absolutly true... 100%

Trump and the Republicans can talk about Best Economy ever, but the GDP is up and life expectancy is down, Income inequality is at it's highest rate in over 50 years, 78% of workers are living paycheck to paycheck, 40% of americans can't afford an emergency $400 expense, 64% of Americans are at risk to retiring broke, the labor force participation rate is lower than in 2008 during the recession, We've automated away 4 million jobs in PA, OH, MI and WI, the Federal reserve is still pumping billions into financial markets to keep them afloat, and we are in the midst of the most extreme "winner take all" economy in history.

You want stats, look them up for yourself, I'm not going to do the work for you.

And if you wish, you can keep pumping up Trump and his economy, but you don't do it justice unless you include the Debt and deficit.....