Two topics today, since I've been off of posting (guests) but things are happening.
No “further” punishment of any kind may be imposed, though the removed officer, including an ex-president, may later be tried and punished in the ordinary courts, for the very offenses that were grounds of removal.
First, if the Senate votes in favor of removal from office, can further steps be taken? In short, but the Senate and Congress, "no," but by the courts after removal, "yes." This must weigh quite heavily on Trump's mind, to the extent that he can think that far ahead and strategically.
On a different topic, and going back a step in the process, here are the two key questions that each senator will be called upon to answer. In some sense, it's simple. But as we go forward, we'll dive more deeply into "high crimes and misdemeanors," although the "bribery" provision may apply in Trump's case in dealing with Ukraine. (As we'll learn from other sources, the distinction between bribery and extortion is not an easy one to draw, and to some extent, they are flip sides of the same coin.)
In voting on each Article of Impeachment, each senator, acting in a capacity combining those of judge and jury, is registering his best judgment “on the facts” and “on the law.” This means that he is answering two questions together: “Did the president do what he is charged in this Article with having done?” “If he did, did that action constitute an impeachable offense within the meaning of the constitutional phrase?”
Black, Charles L., Jr. & Bobbitt, Philip, Impeachment: An Handbook, New Edition (p. 14). Yale University Press. Kindle Edition.
