The ignorance of people never amaze me, here is what the CONSTITUTION say about the impeachment process:
From Cornell Law school
IMPEACHMENT
The impeachment provisions of the Constitution
839 were derived from English practice, but there are important differences. In England, impeachment had a far broader scope. While impeachment was a device to remove from office one who abused his office or misbehaved but who was protected by the Crown, it could be used against anyone—office holder or not—and was penal in nature, with possible penalties of fines, imprisonment, or even death.
840 By contrast, the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office.
Impeachment was a device that figured from the first in the plans proposed to the Convention; discussion addressed such questions as what body was to try impeachments and what grounds were to be stated as warranting impeachment.
841 The attention of the Framers was for the most part fixed on the President and his removal, and the results of this narrow frame of reference are reflected in the questions unresolved by the language of the Constitution.
bolding mine
LINK
=====
More HERE
That is what Impeach process is all about is to
remove upon conviction a person from an elective office, and never run for the office again.
Impeachment and conviction process only applies to those who are in office.
Richard Nixed resigned to avoid the developing Impeachment that was going to pass on him, it was then dropped, because he was no longer in office.
The Clinton impeachment process was all partisan politics since his dumb sexual dalliance was never "high crimes and misdemeanors, bribery or treason" level offence.