From: user6340@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   DocUFO  posted:   
   > On 2/19/2026 3:09 PM, Steven Douglas wrote:   
   > > JTEM  posted:   
   > >> On 2/19/26 4:36 PM, DocUFO wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >>> It suddenly came in a shocking majority vote   
   > >>> by the Senate to proceed with the impeachment   
   > >>> of DJT!!!.....   
   > >>   
   > >> Lol!  P.T. Barnum was an optimist...   
   > >>   
   > >> You know that the Senate doesn't do that, CAN'T do that!   
   > >   
   > > I doubt Doc understood your point about the Senate   
   > > not voting to impeach. Just so Doc knows, it's the   
   > > House of Representatives that votes to impeach. It's   
   > > the Senate that conducts the trial, with the Chief   
   > > Justice of the Supreme Court presiding over the trial.   
   > >   
   > > Then the Senate votes on whether or not the person   
   > > who was impeached will be removed from office.   
   >   
   > And just so that you understand that the entire basis of   
   > the A.I. prank is that I and most Americans know a   
   > President cannot be removed from office by a House   
   > majority vote for impeachment but only by a two-thirds   
   > majority vote in the Senate trial.   
      
   Yet the subject line of this thread mentions the   
   Senate voting to impeach Trump. However, as you   
   now acknowledge, that's just not the way it works.   
   >   
   > No such situation has yet arisen in our history.   
   > They all escaped removal and punishment.   
      
   By punishment, you mean removal from office, right?   
   >   
   > The wrongdoers   
   > are protected from criminal punishment by the 25th   
   > Amendment.   
      
   Oh, you actually think impeachment and removal from   
   office DOES involve criminal punishment? Because the   
   impeachment process in Congress does NOT prescribe   
   criminal punishment. And the 25th Amendment is not   
   what you apparently think it is.   
   >   
   > After Watergate, most Americans of my age group well   
   > understand the straightforward requirements for the   
   > removal of a President. Neither impeachment nor   
   > a Senate trial ever occurred since Nixon had found   
   > that resigning and "presidential immunity" were more   
   > than enough to save his authoritarian crooked butt.   
      
   I wonder what you'd think if you were to find out   
   that Obama has his administration spy on Trump's   
   campaign during the 2016 presidential campaign?   
   Would you say Obama has a crooked butt? Probably   
   not, because you've shown that you have no real   
   principles. All you have is your partisan bias,   
   which determines whether you think something is   
   right or wrong.   
   >   
   > Donald could do the same, shutting off any legal   
   > retribution as Nixon did effectively, infuriating   
   > Democrats and many Americans.   
      
   You actually believe that by resigning, Nixon   
   removed his legal culpability for having covered   
   up the Watergate break-in? You need to go back   
   and study what actually happened.   
   >   
   > It was then that many   
   > realized the 25th Amendment is antidemocratic and   
   > permits the rich and elite a way out of serving a   
   > prison sentence for a criminal offense.   
      
   You really should educate yourself on what the   
   25th Amendment actually says.   
   >   
   > Yet, a   
   > President can still be charged with a civil offense   
   > and brought to civil court during his tenure.   
      
   That's true. That's what happened to Bill Clinton   
   with the Paula Jones civil lawsuit -- in which   
   Clinton originally lied under oath to get the   
   lawsuit dismissed, until the judge discovered   
   that Bill lied under oath in her court, and she   
   reinstated the case and fined Bill $90,000 and   
   he lost his law license for five years.   
   >   
   > There are hardly any older Americans that do not   
   > understand the process that you wrongly think they   
   > are ill informed of.   
      
   Then I'm surprised that you gave this thread the   
   subject line you did.   
   >   
   > And that of course includes me   
   > who well recalls the Watergate debacle.   
      
   I wonder how well you'll ever recall Obama's   
   spying on Trump's campaign in 2016?   
   >   
   > Donald can escape as Nixon did and it is likely that   
   > if overwhelming evidence awaits to convict him of a   
   > criminal offense,   
      
   What criminal offense? Don't just make this kind   
   of false accusation without naming the crime.   
   Unless you know you're full of crap (which you   
   are), and therefore you have no real crime to   
   name (which is the reason you named no crime).   
   >   
   > he'd scoot away with a Nixonian legal maneuver.   
      
   What was Nixon's legal maneuver?   
   >   
   > Or perhaps seek asylum in a host   
   > nation that has no extradition policy and likes him.   
      
   Are you really becoming even wackier than you've   
   already shown yourself to be, for years upon years?   
   >   
   > That'd only leave a very few nations he could seek   
   > asylum in - Russia, Israel being the top choices   
   > where slim majorities support him.   
   > He could also commit suicide   
      
   You are truly insane, Doc. Maybe it's time for   
   you to quit while you're behind.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)