Reply #13: Obviously she has a say in it, but she also has a duty under

[tularetom]

the constitution to defend and uphold it. When she feels it has been violated it is her job to bring impeachment proceedings.

Perhaps she doesn't feel unauthorized wiretaps, loss of habeas corpus, usurpation of congress' war making prerogatives etc etc are violations of the constitution. If this is true she is sadly out of touch and should not be in a position of authority in the opposition party.

B ut should she feel they are breaches of the constitution, as I understand it, the founding fathers intended for impeachment to be a tool to be used to remedy those breaches, either by correction of the offending acts, or failing that, by removal from office by the senate.

It occurs to me that she may be holding back for fear of displaying unseemly ambition (she is after all next in line in the presidential succession process). Fine. Get someone else to champion it (like Tom delay did with clinton) and stand back and let it take its course.

To do nothing is to concur in the actions of dick and bush.