Barry doesn't necessarily need to be convicted by the Senate. Nixon resigned after the House passage of allegations (impeached). And, it was 2+ years before SCOTUS ordered the release of the Watergate tapes which then caused a "lack of confidence" within the Senate. Nixon, of course, resigned before he was "convicted."
If enough of the country is aware Barry is a usurper, there's little doubt he'd retain the confidence of anyone in Congress except the far left (Pelosi, Reed, Waxman, etc). I can't imagine the joint chiefs of staff would continue to honor any "order" coming from a usurper. Barry can be "forced" to resign.
Yes, I agree with your evaluation. But, I will not get my hopes up over this.
No, Nixon resigned when the House Judiciary Committee approved 3 articles of Impeachment.
Nixon, unlike Clinton, was never impeached by the House. The House brought 4 articles of impeachment against him. Nixon did have enough honor to resign, again unlike Billy Jeff.
Only two Presidents have been impeached, Andrew Johnson (Lincoln's VP) and William Jefferson Blythe Clinton. Neither was convicted in the Senate. Although in Johnson's case I believe the Senators at least looked at the evidence, and did not argue Scottish law. In fact they took over 2 months to do so, and fell only 1 vote short of conviction. There were 11 articles of impeachment. But Johnson's real "crime" was trying to "go easy" on the defeated South, as Lincoln wished to do, and being a Southerner himself.
Clinton's was lying under oath.