Why Censure could redress the political divide while Impeachment-Trial will enflame it

 The following is a Dailykos article posted Tuesday 2/3/21 - and writer cut off from responding to comments. 

There is not a person reading this who does not deplore Donald J. Trump, and wants to see him pay for the harm he has done to our country.   This being a given,  the question is whether his being subjected to Impeachment (the term commonly includes the second part, which is the trial by the Senate) would be the most productive way of diminishing the residue of internecine hatred that he has generated. 

Trump is no longer the President who by executive order can control much of  the levers of power in this country.   He had candidly discussed his followers being armed and willing to defend his America against their common enemies. He had boldly encouraged such actions, calling for insurrection against the Governor of Michigan and others, leading to her almost being kidnapped and executed.  He did the calculation that while he had full support of maybe only 40% of the public, they owned the armor piercing machine guns, with the will to use them.

The general support among Democrats to impeach citizen Trump raises the question of whether it will be the optimal approach to dissipate the unconditional fealty of his acolytes , especially since the Chief Justice who is charged with presiding over presidential impeachments has refused to do so. 

This segment of the following law review article advances the interpretation that refusal of Chief Justice Roberts to preside negates the constitutional legitimacy of this trial:

PP 106

However, Chief Justice Rehnquist identified the Chief Justice's role in presidential impeachments to be an "explicit constitutional constraint. . . on the impeachment power., 87 To the extent that this conception of the duty to preside is accurate, the Chief Justice's part in impeachment proceedings cannot be a complete nullity.I1. CONVENTIONAL IDEAS ABOUT THE DUTY

--------—

The following is an alternative approach that is gaining traction, from the Washington Post last week:

 ------

The prospect of likely acquittal for Donald Trump at his Senate trial has some Democrats contemplating an off-ramp that would condemn the former president but stop short of impeachment and a ban from future office.

Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said Wednesday that he has been exploring drafting a bipartisan censure of Trump that would short-circuit a potentially lengthy trial that could impede progress on other Democratic priorities. “It could be an alternative,” he told reporters, saying he wanted the Senate to focus on responding to the coronavirus pandemic and confirming President Biden’s Cabinet.

“To do a trial knowing you’ll get 55  votes (12 less than needed) at the max seems to me to be not the right prioritization of our time.”

 Kaine’s focus on an alternative, which has been brewing since the House voted to impeach Trump over his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, came a day after the vast majority of Republican senators signaled doubts about the constitutional basis for trying an ex-president on impeachment charges. (confirmed by the preceding Law Review Article)

---—

One does not have to have sympathy for Trump, but overarching seething contempt is a luxury that dare not be indulged.  The hatred targeted at those  who invaded the Capitol is a human reaction having nothing to do with partisan politics.   Their rage was unrestrained by normal human compassion.  In a flash, Trump's subservient loyal Vice President who dared to flout his orders, was transformed into a despised enemy.

This ransacking was an orgy of hatred, which we now know is continuing after he is no longer President,  Those of his party who had condemned him for his promoting the insurrection are now genuflecting to their leader,  begging to be forgiven for their brief loss of deference

The thrust of the argument for convicting Trump is that he was sponsoring terror.  In a legal setting such as the impeachment trial, assumption of innocence is a barrier to conviction, while a censure has no such impediment.  The fear of being killed or maimed by the rabid vicious mob who invaded the Capitol is so vivid, so genuine -- that it cannot be dismissed by anyone, even the most subservient of Trumps followers.     

While it is unrealistic for these Senate Republicans to vote for impeachment,  it is possible  that there could be a contagion of humanity that would get every one of them to vote to censure  the person who promoted this catastrophe. 

This would close the reign of Donald. J. Trump who besmirched the office he held, and just possibly would ensure that this condemnation would ring through ages to come.