Answers to the Kushyot; Why Do Ben Grusha Edim Not Become Bnai Gerusha?

Answering the two Kushyot
The Ritvah explains that the mishna in Sanhedrin is the first example of a "kulah" or leniency within the realm of עדים זוממים - instead of receiving the more serious punishment ie שריפה, they receive the less severe one ie חנק.  Our mishna in Makkot is a continuation of the same pattern - cases SO lenient that there is no "remnant" of the כאשר זמם principle from the pasuk, but lashes instead.

Given the mishna in Sanhedrin, the Gemara's answer seems to be (with the help of Rashi)
a) that the title כיצד העדים נעשים זוממים is an appropriate opening line of the mishna.  Because the actual intent of the mishna is: "How do zomimin, (who have such an extreme leniency that they do not receive the punishment of zomimin at all) nevertheless get punished?" Na'asim in this context, means how do they nevertheless receive the punishment due to zomimin? According to the Gemara's answer, the term "zomimin" is not only appropriate for a set of edim that get the classic punishment, but also to the inherent "conspirator" status of the edim following the arrival of the second set.  How do zomimin (conspiring witnesses) who don't receive the classic "zomimin" penalty nevertheless receive their just dues?

b) the second question of the Gemara, namely, that if process is of interest, that's the topic of the mishna on 5a, automatically falls - our mishna is not interested in process, but in consequences.

Moving On
The Gemara then asks מנא הני מילי- and we explained that this meant that it's looking for the source for the din in the mishna that the edim who accuse Reuven of being a Ben Gerusha, themeselves do not become "B'nai Gerusha"?

The Gemara answers that it says in the pasuk ועשיתם לו - to him and not to his seed.  If you give the edim the status of bnai gerusha, you are imposing that status on their children after them.  Because a Chalal produces a Chalal.

The Gemara retorts by asking: "Why can't we invalidate the witnesses, but leave their children's Kohen status intact?"

Carlos said he didn't understand the question - after all, that's impossible! If someone is a Chalal, he cannot father a regular Kohen!

I tried to explain the concept in the following way: The retributive punishment of the edim zomimin is itself a chiddush - and giving a new halachic status, normatively a function of being born to a Chalal, is a bigger chiddush!  Therefore, why couldn't the edim become chalalim, with their children still remaining Kohanim!? After all, the whole status change is artificial.

Tonight, we are going to study the Gemara's answer to that question, and hopefully get to the top of ב:  by the end of Thursday evening's shiur.