Replies

Okay, the impeachment process works like this: First, one or more articles of impeachment are drawn up by the House. If passed, these articles constitute an indictment, like a prosecutor filing a charge, or a grand jury issuing an indictment.

An article of impeachment once passed then goes to the Senate, which decides whether the person charged is innocent or guilty. If guilty, that person is removed from office.

The process works the same for the President and for judges, either can be impeached.

In 1998, the Senate admitted that the evidence of guilt was overwhelming and indisputable, yet still decided not to convict, roughly on the grounds that the behavior charged was "not bad enough" to consummate the impeachment and remove Clinton from office.

The question left open is what behavior, precisely, IS bad enough, if lying under oath in court isn't. Thus far, no behavior has yet been identified that is bad enough to remove an official from office.

To make a long story short, an impeachment, being no more than a charge/indictment, is no punishment whatsoever. It can only be construed even as figurative punishment if the person charged is shamed by it. In this particular case, the person charged clearly has at no time had any shame, so we lack even a figurative punishment. The end result of impeachment was nothing at all.