Do we need to ask Kingston if he supports impeachment?

Seems like it.

From the AJC: Speaking to the Aaron McCready show:

Kingston: Not a day goes by when people don’t talk to us about impeachment. I don’t know what rises to that level yet, but I know that there’s a mounting frustration that a lot of people are getting to and I think Congress is going to start looking at it very seriously.

McCready: Well, if this lawsuit, and I said this in the first half of the show. I’m concerned about this lawsuit because, and first of all, I agree that the president needs to be held accountable. But with this lawsuit, by the time there’s any resolution in it, he’ll be out of office, so is this maybe the first step to issue articles of impeachment?

Kingston: You know, it could go in that direction if there was a big discussion. I mean, I think it’s possible, it keeps getting worse and worse. It could go in that direction.

I was super excited that the Republican primary left us with two semi-reasonable candidates of which I preferred Congressman Kingston. Having said that, these past couple weeks are making me rethink my initial feelings of relief at the outcome. Jack Kingston is currently a member of the House of Representatives and as such he’d need to vote on Articles if Impeachment. So his opinion is one of the few that truly matter on the subject. From the above, it seems as though he’d consider it. Whatever one’s views of the decisions and tone of the White House, it is an extreme point of view to think the President has committed a High Crime or Misdemeanor such that he needs to be tried for it and expelled from office. The Senate is the more deliberative body – one would hope Kingston would cool this rhetoric instead of increase speculation. Or maybe he just supports Joe Biden for President?


  1. Three Jack says:

    Thanks for bringing this up Stefan. The same question was posed in the 11th CD debate Sunday with both candidates promising to support ‘an inquiry’ into impeachment proceedings. Seems the wackjobs have really had an impact this cycle.

    If the GOP wants to really experience serious liberal policies, go for impeachment which will likely end up with no conviction and ‘President Elizabeth Warren’ in 2017.

  2. FranInAtlanta says:

    There are some issues where one can’t straddle the fence. This is one. I plan to vote for Perdue anyway (thinking the Senate needs more life experience outside of the political world) – this just makes me more certain.
    A vote for Nunn is a vote for Harry Reid or whoever would follow him on the Dem side. Otherwise, I would have considered her if one of what I thought was one of the more extreme candidates won.
    Obama won election twice and he is doing what he said he would do – I didn’t like it then and don’t like it now but that doesn’t mean impeachment.
    And, yes, the lawsuit will take a while, but I want to tie the hands of any President who wants to rewrite laws on his or her own – whatever the party.

    • Harry says:

      Some of us believe impeachment proceedings are warranted but realize it’s not politically feasible at present.

        • Harry says:

          In your humble opinion? Sorry, but here’s a list of unprecedented, impeachable offenses:
          First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
          First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.
          First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States.
          First President to violate the War Powers Act.
          First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
          First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
          First President to spend a trillion dollars on “shovel-ready” jobs when there was no such thing as “shovel-ready” jobs.
          First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
          First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.
          First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S., including those with criminal convictions.
          First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
          First President to tell a CEO of a major corporation (Chrysler) to resign.
          First President to terminate America’s ability to put a man in space.
          First President to cancel the National Day of Prayer and to say that America is no longer a Christian nation.
          First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
          First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.
          First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke out on the reasons for their rate increases.
          First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
          First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
          First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
          First President to actively try to bankrupt an American industry (coal).
          First President to fire an inspector general of AmeriCorps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
          First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office.
          First President to surround himself with radical left wing anarchists.
          First President to golf more than 150 separate times in his five years in office.
          First President to hide his birth, medical, educational and travel records.
          First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
          First President to go on multiple “global apology tours” and concurrent “insult our friends” tours.
          First President to go on over 17 lavish vacations, in addition to date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayers.
          First President to have personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.
          First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.
          First President to fly in a personal trainer from Chicago at least once a week at taxpayer expense.
          First President to repeat the Holy Quran and tell us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth
          First President to side with a foreign nation over one of the American 50 states (Mexico vs Arizona).
          First President to tell the military men and women that they should pay for their own private insurance because they “volunteered to go to war and knew the consequences.”

          And then we get to the heavy stuff that needs more investigative discovery, which Obama has attempted to cover up and shut down.

          • Stefan says:

            You really think the number of times someone plays golf is an impeachable offense? Are you going to attempt to jail Arnold Palmer? Because if so, I will lead a hunger strike where hordes thousands strong will drink only lemonade and sweet tea mixed together just-so until he is freed.

            Please call my bluff; I love that drink.

          • c_murrayiii says:

            Sigh…shouldn’t take the bait, but I can’t help myself. First, he is not the first President to “violate” the war power’s act, which is itself probably unconstitutional. Also, Harry Truman attempted to seize the entire US steel industry, but he was never impeached for that. Further, just because a court strikes down LATER a President’s actions, or a President does not execute the law as directed, does not make it a high crime or misdemeanor, which is what is required for impeachment. The rest of your list is a sad bunch of thinly veiled racist/anti-Islam garbage, that in no way amounts to impeachable acts. In fact, many things you list represents actions/thoughts specifically protected by the Constitution. This type of nonsense is why the average American will not take the GOP serious. Being a bad President does not warrant impeachment. In fact, having a bad President is pretty much the norm in this country.

  3. Jon Richards says:

    This sounds to me like the classic candidate waffle. Impeachment is obviously a sensitive subject. I for one don’t agree with it. But, there are some that feel strongly that impeachment should be pursued.

    If the candidate gives a definitive answer, he will alienate a portion of his potential voters. The solution is to give a non-answer answer like he did here. For the national press, he is more definitive, assuming fewer voters will be listening.

      • Michael Silver says:

        Kingston is an open borders chamber of commerce go-along-get-along DC insider who has empowered Pres. Obama to do what he’s done. What’s Kingston going to say ….. “I can’t impeach Obama for using the laws I voted for AND funded”. Its exposes his true record and his impotency in DC.

        The Conservative response would have been to point out that House can regain control of the government via repealing laws and withholding funding. Impeachment is nothing but a go-nowhere distraction from what the House actually has power to do.

Comments are closed.