Yes and the Republicans who voted against him as well. Your point?

“Hastings filed suit in federal court claiming that his impeachment trial was invalid because he was tried by a Senate committee, not in front of the full Senate, and that he had been acquitted in a criminal trial. Judge Stanley Sporkin ruled in favor of Hastings, remanding the case back to the Senate, but stayed his ruling pending the outcome of an appeal to the Supreme Court in a similar case regarding Judge Walter Nixon, who had also been impeached and removed.

Sporkin found some “crucial distinctions”[2] between Nixon’s case and Hastings’, specifically, that Nixon had been convicted criminally, and that Hastings was not found guilty by two-thirds of the committee who actually “tried” his impeachment in the Senate. He further added that Hastings had a right to trial by the full Senate.

The Supreme Court, however, ruled that the federal courts have no jurisdiction over Senate impeachment matters, and Sporkin’s ruling was vacated, and Hastings’ conviction and removal were upheld.”

So to re-cap, Hastings was indeed impeached, albeit by an irregular proceeding, on the basis of accusations of criminal activity prior to any actual finding of guilt in a court of law. When Hastings finally had his day in a real court of law, he was acquitted of all charges. Yes, such a scandal. Imagine, a man who has never been convicted of a crime being allowed to serve in government. It should be enough that his political enemies engineered his legislative lynching.

Impeachment is roughly the same as an indictment. Clinton was impeached but not convicted and removed.