The House have approved this article of impeachment, but now the Senate needs 60 votes to, in what the constitution refers to as, “remove him from office”, but the main issue of concern is whether this could be used to block Trump from taking office again. However, even with now vice president Harris in the Senate, the impeachment is being sped through a still republican Senate, and they need 16 Republican defectors to vote against Trump, something that looks extremely unlikely. The best-case scenario for pro-impeachment politicians is that the House has impeached and the Senate censures the ex-president, which is in essence just a strong worded email. But the Senate could also expunge the censure if the Republicans do well in the midterms, so it is a massive waste of time ultimately.
Even democratic Senator Joe Manchin called for Democrats to be rational in the impeachment of Trump, asking, “why go through the exercise again if it’s going to be futile?” . Clearly something is needed to set the precedent that this kind of presidential behaviour is unacceptable, but ultimately censure is the only real option and it is more of a rhetorical slap on the wrist. In this way the impeachment process needs to be more about protecting against future evils than punishment past crimes, and for this reason it's more symbolic than anything else. The impeachment should be recognised as such as the Capitol riot probably speaks for itself as a smudge on Trump's legacy, without having to fuel further “witch-hunt” claims and attempt to block Trump from politics.