You are suggesting that the meaning of the word has now changed to include conviction by the Senate. At this point in time you are mistaken, though as an ardent student of our language this is something that fascinates me, watching changes in the language and understanding why the change is accepted.
Were someone to say that Clinton was not impeached, we would think him ignorant. If the House were to vote Articles of Impeachment, they would certainly say that he was impeached. This talk would mystify the plebes as they would not know the difference between being accused and convicted, for in their minds, there IS no difference.
Of course I do not intend to impeach your integrity, for you are a fine Freeper, and a better man than I, and so say all of us!
I was with you up and until the ad hominem part: “This talk would mystify the plebes”, then I lost all respect for your opinion. HEHHEH Self Righteous comes to mind.
I stand corrected. A simple matter of misunderstanding.