I received the news with zero emotion. Former FBI senior executive Peter Strzok had been fired.

My custom when a fellow law enforcement colleague has fallen on hard times or gotten caught up in bad circumstances, even of their own design, has typically been to feel empathy. And yet Strzok’s deserved firing has left me feeling empty, hollow, and numb. Yes, some form of justice has been served. Strzok’s conduct while overseeing two supremely consequential FBI investigations was unconscionable. He tarnished the badge and committed the ultimate bureau “sin”— he embarrassed the FBI.

Strzok was the epitome of a “blue-flamer," FBI parlance for a ruthless promotion-seeker. He may well serve as a cautionary tale during future reviews of the Robert Mueller-era management program named “Up of Out," that long unpopular administrative contrivance sought to incentivize junior employee migrations to Washington D.C. and FBI headquarters. Hell, if you can’t attract experienced street agents to staff cubicles at headquarters, simply provide housing and per diems and promise promotional considerations not available to the humps laboring in FBI field offices to callow youth— or so the logic goes.

But all things considered, Strzok is not a loathsome character in this political melodrama. He is pitiable. My initial assessment of him was that he was a hapless victim of circumstance, a forlorn character in a Greek tragedy. The president, who characteristically tweeted his unconstrained glee this morning at Strzok’s misfortune, hasn’t helped. His continual bashing of imperfect FBI officials has a more than tawdry appearance and can certainly be interpreted as potential obstruction of justice in the Russian collusion investigation that Strzok once led.

But President Trump is a politician. And though I have oft cautioned there may be no there there in the case of his campaign's alleged collusion with the Kremlin, there are remedies for his actions, either at the ballot box or through the political process of impeachment.

The only remedy for Strzok’s disgraceful actions was just summarily levied— firing. And he ironically has met the same fate as his mentor, former deputy director, Andrew McCabe, who was fired for lying under oath, by the attorney general, after a recommendation from the inspector general’s office. In fact, the only true “collusion” that may ever be determined could well have been perpetrated by McCabe, Strzok, and FBI attorney Lisa Page, as evidenced by those infamous text message exchanges.

Look, I have never ascribed to the theory that a pernicious governmental “deep state” exists and I have complete confidence in the IG process and findings. Michael Horowitz has determined that there were no material actions conducted in furtherance of a scheme to impact the 2016 election. Thus, Russian efforts aside, nothing related to James Comey’s FBI was determined to have purposely impeded the will of the American people who elected Trump to be their president.

That doesn’t mean some in the FBI, like Strzok, didn’t attempt to do just that. Finding no evidence of material acts does not mitigate the reprehensible discussions that apparently took place between Strzok, McCabe, and a small cabal of pathetic FBI senior executives. And Strzok’s recent graceless appearance before Congress, when called to testify, assuaged none of us who had concerns about his judgment and fealty to the Constitution.

I weep no tears of sorrow for Strzok’s professional demise. The damage he has done to the reputations of governmental institutions was tangible and more lasting than some would make you believe about a few ill-advised presidential tweets.

Peter Strzok broke our cardinal rule as FBI agents. He deeply embarrassed the Bureau. He had to go.

James A. Gagliano (@JamesAGagliano) worked in the FBI for 25 years. He is a law enforcement analyst for CNN and an adjunct assistant professor in homeland security and criminal justice at St. John's University.