What is difference between censure vs. impeachment?

Here is big difference between censure vs. impeachment...


Censure:


Censure is a procedure for publicly reprimanding a public official for inappropriate behavior. When the President is censured, it serves merely as a condemnation and has no direct effect on the validity of presidency, nor are there any other particular legal consequences. Unlike impeachment, censure has no basis in the Constitution, or in the rules of the Senate and Congress. It derives from the formal condemnation of either congressional body of their own members.

Simply put: it is just a reprimand or slap on the wrist.

To date, Andrew Jackson is the only sitting President to be successfully censured, and his censure was subsequently expunged from the record. Currently, On July 31, 2007, Retired Army General Philip Kensinger was censured by the US Army. The censure came after misleading investigators of the Pat Tillman death in 2004.

Impeachment:

Here is the process of impeachment:

The impeachment-trial procedure is in two steps:

First, Congress must first pass "articles of impeachment" by a simple majority. (All fifty state legislatures as well as the District of Columbia city council may also pass articles of impeachment against their own executives.) The articles of impeachment constitute the formal allegations. Upon their passage, the defendant has been "impeached."

Secondly, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a President, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings. Otherwise, the Vice President, in his capacity as President of the Senate, or the President pro tempore of the Senate presides. This may include the impeachment of the Vice President, although legal theories suggest that allowing a person to be the judge in the case where she or he was the defendant wouldn't be permitted. If the Vice President did not preside over an impeachment (of someone other than the President), the duties would fall to the President Pro Tempore.

In order to convict the accused, a 2/3 of the majority of the Senators present is required. Conviction automatically removes the defendant from office. Following conviction, the Senate may vote to further punish the individual by barring them from holding future federal office (either elected or appointed). Despite a conviction by the Senate, the defendant remains liable to criminal prosecution. It is possible to impeach someone even after the accused has vacated their office in order to disqualify the person from future office or from certain emoluments of their prior office (such as a pension). If a 2/3 majority of the senators present does not vote "Guilty" on one or more of the charges, the defendant is acquitted and no punishment is imposed.

Presidents such as Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton were being impeached by Congress. In the case of impeachment of Bush and Cheney, it is a challenge to impeach them by Congress and Senate according to the process because:

1. Chief Justice of the U.S. is John Roberts.

2. Vice President Cheney is the President of the Senate.

3. There is a tug of war with the GOP to wanting Bush and Cheney impeached.

So, there are your defintions of censure and impeachment.

On a side note: The impeachment of Bill Clinton was pure political and personal. Clinton could have been censured by Congress for his inappropriate act with an intern IMHO.