Is it over yet?

That’s become a familiar refrain on this page and in the opinion sections of newspapers across Pennsylvania as the saga of Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s criminal conduct unfolded over the course of more than a year.

On Monday Kane was convicted on all counts — two counts of perjury and 10 counts of abusing the powers of her office — brought against her by Montgomery County District Attorney Kevin Steele.

The leader of Kane’s own Democratic Party, Gov. Tom Wolf, on Monday again called for her to resign. State House of Representatives Republican leader Dave Reed, R-Indiana, and a bevy of lawmakers have also called for her resignation.

On Tuesday Kane mercifully acceded, announcing in a press release that she would resign by this evening. Facing sentencing in 90 days or less, Kane’s stint in the news is surely, finally, done, right? It’s finally over.

Not really. As we predicted on Monday, Kane’s lawyer, Gerald Shargel, has vowed to appeal the jury’s verdicts. Kane’s case will linger in the news for some time. And even after it is put to bed, the scars from her tenure as AG will remain.

Pennsylvania taxpayers have been paying the $158,764 salary of an AG incapable of doing her job — Kane’s law license was suspended by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court last September — for nearly a year.

In that time, her office’s only achievements of note were conducting a job interview with the son of a key witness against her, being accused of using public money to fund her own defense, and spending more than $500,000 in taxpayer money to settle lawsuits brought by current and former employees.

Kane is right to acknowledge that the jig is up and to step down immediately. Her tenure has been an absolute disaster. What should have been a keynote moment — the first election of a Democrat and a woman as Pennsylvania’s AG — has instead been footnoted by criminal scandal and the hemorrhaging of hundreds of thousands of dollars in public money lost because of Kane’s untenable administrative practices and juvenile judgment.

Not only is she unfit to serve out the remainder of her term, Kane is clearly unfit to hold elected or appointed office ever again. So it’s been tempting to advocate for state lawmakers to set in motion impeachment proceedings against her.

The procedure would not only have removed Kane from office, it would have have barred her from ever holding another appointed or elected office in Pennsylvania. That certainly seemed fitting for a politician who has shown she cares nothing for the best interests of the Commonwealth.

But impeachment would have come with a cost. Media reports estimated that the cost of such a proceeding could have been $2.4 to $2.6 million. Advocates in the House have said they don’t believe the bill would run that high, but any additional payout associated with Kane’s time in office is undesirable.

Now we must trust that her terrible performance and miserable legacy have already rendered her too toxic for voters to ever welcome her back onto the public’s payroll.