# What is Nancy Pelosi'a stated reason(s) for taking Impeachment off the table? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 18, 2008, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954 "2008-07-18T14:13:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2008, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/81 "2008-07-23T13:08:34Z")
[QUOTE=Magiver] I laid out a history of deceit and destruction by Saddam including a mobile refinement program. [/quote] There was no mobile refinement program and you wishing it so doesn’t make it true. Again, the CIA has categorically stated that there was no refinement program. > [@](#): > > He had everything he needed and the time to make it happen. He didn’t have everything he needed. In fact, he had almost none of the equipment he needed. You couldn’t be more wrong. > [@](#): > > I do know that the Israelis recently bombed what they deemed a Syrian nuclear plant. Which has nothing to do with Iraq. In other words, since you have nothing new to offer since the name calling, I continue to accept your surrender in this debate. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2008, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/82 "2008-07-23T15:06:20Z")
[QUOTE=xtisme] It does? I thought it only required a simple majority to begin proceedings. How did the Republican’s get a 2/3rds vote in the Senate for the Clinton impeachment hearings?? -XT [/QUOTE] Impeachment occurs in the House and requires only a simple majority. The trial is held in the Senate, and requires a 2/3 majority to convict. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2008, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/83 "2008-07-23T15:08:17Z")
That’s what I thought. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2008, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/84 "2008-07-23T17:59:05Z")
[QUOTE=Ravenman] There was no mobile refinement program and you wishing it so doesn’t make it true. Again, the CIA has categorically stated that there was no refinement program. [/QUOTE] The CIA had no way of finding a mobile system nor do they know what Saddam trucked to Syria (who started a nuclear program). You’re assertion that Saddam could be trusted is without any basis. [QUOTE=Ravenman] He didn’t have everything he needed. In fact, he had almost none of the equipment he needed. You couldn’t be more wrong. [/QUOTE] He had the ability to make mobile calutrons, 1.2 million lbs of yellowcake fuel to refine, 4 years of unknown activity and the financial assets to make it happen. [He had the plans and the scientists to construct them](http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/25/sprj.irq.centrifuge/). What didn’t he have? [QUOTE=Ravenman] In other words, since you have nothing new to offer since the name calling, I continue to accept your surrender in this debate. 🙂 [/QUOTE] I’ve shown that Saddam kept the fuel, plans, and personnel to make nuclear weapons. By keeping the fuel, and hidding the plans it is absolutely logical to assume he constructed (or retained) additional equipment that was not found. His actions were not of someone dismantling a weapons program, they were of a person who fully intended to build them. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2008, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/85 "2008-07-23T18:20:32Z")
What about [this](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7634313/): > [@](#): > > In his final word, the CIA’s top weapons inspector in Iraq said Monday that the hunt for weapons of mass destruction has “gone as far as feasible” and has found nothing, closing an investigation into the purported programs of Saddam Hussein that were used to justify the 2003 invasion. > > … > > No information gleaned from questioning Iraqis supported the possibility, one addendum said. The Iraq Survey Group believes “it was unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place. However, ISG was unable to rule out unofficial movement of limited WMD-related materials. Or maybe you would like to read the [this report](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/06/world/middleeast/06intel.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) which exposes all of what you say as nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2008, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/86 "2008-07-23T18:28:37Z")
[QUOTE=Magiver] The CIA had no way of finding a mobile system nor do they know what Saddam trucked to Syria (who started a nuclear program). You’re assertion that Saddam could be trusted is without any basis. [/quote] The CIA has unrestricted access to the whole damn country after the invasion, and after three years of looking, couldn’t find a shred of evidence of a mobile WMD system. in fact, the evidence they found shows that there was a high level decision to stop WMD development after 1991. And nobody is “trusting Saddam” here, these are the facts determined by this country’s intelligence professionals. There were no WMD. There were no WMD programs. Get over it. > [@](#): > > He had the ability to make mobile calutrons, 1.2 million lbs of yellowcake fuel to refine, 4 years of unknown activity and the financial assets to make it happen. [He had the plans and the scientists to construct them](http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/25/sprj.irq.centrifuge/). What didn’t he have? The stuff he had was made prior to 1991 before Iraq was under an international embargo. He didn’t have access to the stuff he needed to build a nuclear weapons program. And, again, the facts show that there was no nuclear program. Iraq didn’t have the equipment to proceed with one. As covered by the CIA’s report, that story was wrong to report that there was high-level direction to bury nuclear components. From the CIA report: > [@CIA](#): > > ``` > * Mahdi Shakur Al ‘Ubaydi—the former head of the pre-1991 centrifuge program—continued to hide centrifuge components and documentation for future effort after the Husayn Kamil defection. We cannot link Al ‘Ubaydi’s efforts to hide these materials after 1994 to any instruction from Regime officials. > > ``` > [@](#): > > I’ve shown that Saddam kept the fuel, plans, and personnel to make nuclear weapons. By keeping the fuel, and hidding the plans it is absolutely logical to assume he constructed (or retained) additional equipment that was not found. His actions were not of someone dismantling a weapons program, they were of a person who fully intended to build them. The fuel was not hidden. We knew about it. In any case, again quoting the CIA, showing there was no nuclear weapons program: > [@CIA](#): > > Post-1991, Iraq had neither rebuilt any capability to convert uranium ore into a form suitable for enrichment nor reestablished other chemical processes related to handling fissile material for a weapons program. Available evidence leads ISG to judge that Iraq’s development of gas centrifuges for uranium enrichment essentially ended in 1991. ISG also judges that Iraq continued work on none of the many other uranium enrichment programs explored or developed prior to 1991, such as EMIS or lasers. It does not appear that Iraq took steps to advance its pre-1991 work in nuclear weapons design and development. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2008, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/87 "2008-07-23T19:54:42Z")
[QUOTE=Ravenman] The CIA has unrestricted access to the whole damn country after the invasion, and after three years of looking, couldn’t find a shred of evidence of a mobile WMD system. in fact, the evidence they found shows that there was a high level decision to stop WMD development after 1991. And nobody is “trusting Saddam” here, these are the facts determined by this country’s intelligence professionals. There were no WMD. There were no WMD programs. Get over it. [/QUOTE] First I never said there were WMD’s. I said he had everything he needed to make them. He fully intended to build them. That is a fact based on intelligence that you seem to ignore and it is backed up by the reality that he kept the fuel, plans, and personnel in place. [QUOTE=Ravenman] The stuff he had was made prior to 1991 before Iraq was under an international embargo. He didn’t have access to the stuff he needed to build a nuclear weapons program. And, again, the facts show that there was no nuclear program. Iraq didn’t have the equipment to proceed with one. As covered by the CIA’s report, that story was wrong to report that there was high-level direction to bury nuclear components. From the CIA report: The fuel was not hidden. We knew about it. In any case, again quoting the CIA, showing there was no nuclear weapons program: [/QUOTE] I never said it was hidden, I said he had 4 years without inspection. He continued to block inspectors after he let them back in. The facts show he retained the material, the plans and the people to make WMD’s and by his own admission he intended to do so, in all forms. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2008, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/88 "2008-07-24T01:47:54Z")
[QUOTE=Magiver] First I never said there were WMD’s. I said he had everything he needed to make them. He fully intended to build them. That is a fact based on intelligence that you seem to ignore and it is backed up by the reality that he kept the fuel, plans, and personnel in place. I never said it was hidden, I said he had 4 years without inspection. He continued to block inspectors after he let them back in. The facts show he retained the material, the plans and the people to make WMD’s and by his own admission he intended to do so, in all forms. [/QUOTE] Possibly so, but after he let Blix in- \*he no longer had them. \* Thus, what was the reason for the invasion? There is no doubt that pre- Desert Storm Saddam had tens of thousands of tonnes of WMD. But again, that was in the past. After Blix got in again, Saddam had no significant WMD. Mere traces and some old shit lost in the desert that was more an environmental hazard than a “weapon”. So, since _at that point in time,_ Iraq had no WMD, what was the reason for invasion- _at that point in time_? True, he could go back to making more, and likely would, so if SH had tossed Blix back out, we’d have some cause for force. But as long as Blix was running around and inspecting- \*there were no WMD. \* ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2008, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/89 "2008-07-24T03:46:35Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] Possibly so, but after he let Blix in- \*he no longer had them. \* Thus, what was the reason for the invasion? There is no doubt that pre- Desert Storm Saddam had tens of thousands of tonnes of WMD. But again, that was in the past. After Blix got in again, Saddam had no significant WMD. Mere traces and some old shit lost in the desert that was more an environmental hazard than a “weapon”. So, since _at that point in time,_ Iraq had no WMD, what was the reason for invasion- _at that point in time_? True, he could go back to making more, and likely would, so if SH had tossed Blix back out, we’d have some cause for force. But as long as Blix was running around and inspecting- \*there were no WMD. \* [/QUOTE] because he kept the material, plans and scientists to make them. Which indicates he indended to make them per his own admission. He showed no change in his attempts to deceive inspectors. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2008, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/90 "2008-07-24T04:57:39Z")
Pelosi is smart enough to realize that Article 2, section 4 of the Constitution states: > [@](#): > > The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. In effect, she realizes that in order to impeach Bush, he must first have committed an impeachable offense. And he hasn’t. ---
**Author:** ![tds1273](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/df705f/32.png) [@tds1273](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tds1273)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2008, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/91 "2008-07-24T17:09:52Z")
I can’t help but wonder- how much did Hillary’s presumed inevitability have to do Pelosi clearing the table? Hillary was, by almost every account, assumed to be the 2008 Democratic Presidential nominee since well before 2006. It no doubt would have been a whole lot harder sell on either side(the impeachment or the campaign) with both of them sharing the common and problematic link of Bill Clinton. I think that by the time it was clear that Clinton wouldn’t be the nominee, it was far to late in the game to start any serious hearings. …that, and most of the Dems have shown themselves to be largely invertebrate. ---
**Author:** ![BarnOwl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e95f7d/32.png) [@BarnOwl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BarnOwl)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2008, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/92 "2008-07-24T18:53:37Z")
[QUOTE=tds1273] I can’t help but wonder- how much did Hillary’s presumed inevitability have to do Pelosi clearing the table? Hillary was, by almost every account, assumed to be the 2008 Democratic Presidential nominee since well before 2006. It no doubt would have been a whole lot harder sell on either side(the impeachment or the campaign) with both of them sharing the common and problematic link of Bill Clinton. I think that by the time it was clear that Clinton wouldn’t be the nominee, it was far to late in the game to start any serious hearings. …that, and most of the Dems have shown themselves to be largely invertebrate. [/QUOTE] Why do you—and anyone else—suppose that Democrats are so spineless? What is it about an asshole like Bush that enables him to intimidate just about everyone who opposes him? Please come up with something else rather than he attacks them as hating America, or not supporting the troops, or unpatriotic. How many of you (assuming you were a Congress person) would cave in when these charges would be leveled against you? Not you? Then why are our elected officials doing so? Something’s very wrong with our government. ---
**Author:** ![tds1273](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/df705f/32.png) [@tds1273](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tds1273)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2008, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/93 "2008-07-24T19:20:14Z")
[QUOTE=BarnOwl] Why do you—and anyone else—suppose that Democrats are so spineless? What is it about an asshole like Bush that enables him to intimidate just about everyone who opposes him? Please come up with something else rather than he attacks them as hating America, or not supporting the troops, or unpatriotic. How many of you (assuming you were a Congress person) would cave in when these charges would be leveled against you? Not you? Then why are our elected officials doing so? [/QUOTE] I’ll admit these are just IMHOCTs, but how about the wiretapping? Who do you think the “permanent Republican majority” Rovian-wing of this administration really cared more about: terrorist or political opponents? I’m sure alot of juicy details crossed alot of phone and internet lines. As well, there were many pols that just went along with the ride for their own corrupt gains of power or money, or to maintain their own butt prints within their Congressional seats. I also believe that the anthrax attacks were home grown and federally owned political terrorist attacks that scared many into capitulating and appeasing the Bush Administration. Whatever the reason, certainly no spines were needed to get to where we are now. > [@](#): > > Something’s very wrong with our government. On this we agree. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2008, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/94 "2008-07-25T02:36:53Z")
[QUOTE=Magiver] because he kept the material, plans and scientists to make them. . [/QUOTE] Not in Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![BarnOwl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e95f7d/32.png) [@BarnOwl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BarnOwl)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2008, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/95 "2008-07-25T03:03:17Z")
[QUOTE=tds1273] I’ll admit these are just IMHOCTs, but how about the wiretapping? Who do you think the “permanent Republican majority” Rovian-wing of this administration really cared more about: terrorist or political opponents? I’m sure alot of juicy details crossed alot of phone and internet lines. As well, there were many pols that just went along with the ride for their own corrupt gains of power or money, or to maintain their own butt prints within their Congressional seats. I also believe that the anthrax attacks were home grown and federally owned political terrorist attacks that scared many into capitulating and appeasing the Bush Administration. Whatever the reason, certainly no spines were needed to get to where we are now. On this we agree. [/QUOTE] I’ve been harboring the same suspicions for some time. But I can’t start a thread without facts, and at the moment I don’t have any. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2008, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/96 "2008-07-25T05:00:44Z")
Don’t forget, guys, we went nuts. We lost our shit, but good. Just in passing on a blog, the factoid: GW’s approval rating Nov 01 was 89%! The tighty righties squeezed 9/11 for every drop of political capital they could, the rest of us could only stare in horror as they scooped up every chip on the table, and praised the Lord for His excellent judgment in making it so. The DNC and the Clintonistas had already been leading the lemming charge, straight over the cliff into the welcoming waters of Republican Lite. A genuine lefty candidate would be lucky to raise bus fare. If they hadn’t so totally screwed the pooch, they would _have_ their dream of an absolute and self-perpetuating regime of Republicans and Me, Toos! Tweedledumb and Tweedledumber. So its not so great, arguing about impeachment and losing. But just be grateful we aren’t arguing about repealing the Presidential terms limit amendment. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2008, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/97 "2008-07-25T05:40:02Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] Not in Iraq. [/QUOTE] Um, what? We just transported 1.2 million lbs of yellowcake out of there. Saddam kept the scientists and hid the plans. Not sure what he trucked to Syria. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2008, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/98 "2008-07-25T05:46:35Z")
Crude oil. Machine parts. Frozen chickens. Super deadly nuclear anthrax spores. The usual. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2008, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/99 "2008-07-25T05:52:27Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Crude oil. Machine parts. Frozen chickens. Super deadly nuclear anthrax spores. The usual. [/QUOTE] the Israelis made gumbo out of it whatever it was. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2008, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954/100 "2008-07-25T12:58:54Z")
[QUOTE=Magiver] Saddam kept the scientists and hid the plans. [/QUOTE] Out of curiosity, when you say Saddam “kept the scientists,” what exactly was he supposed to do with them? Kill them? Expel them from the country? We know they were not working on WMD projects, so why is it an indictment that the scientists still lived in Iraq? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nancy-pelosia-stated-reason-s-for-taking-impeachment-off-the-table/456954.md?page=6)