

I do. Thanks. You’re still focused on the wrong thing here.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not require any specific test which defines “insurrection”. The impeachment is a useful anchor for establishing an agreement that an insurrection did occur and that Trump was, at the very least, an active participant in that insurrection.
The Insurrection Bar to Office: Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment (crsreports.congress.gov) provides an well crafted and neutral review of this. Its closing sentence is particularly relevant to our back and forth:
Congress has previously viewed Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment as establishing an enumerated constitutional qualification for holding office and, consequently, a grounds for possible exclusion.
Republican strategy has long revolved around the targeted devolution of norms. They hide in the cracks between definitions which assume good faith participation in the labor of mutually consensual governance and shield themselves in perpetual faux-victimhood. If Congress does not pursue the execution of Section 3 it is nothing less than an abdication of their duty to their Oath of Office.
Your last paragraph is a result of misunderstandings and assumptions on your part.
This is the Internet’s common wisdom at the moment but it’s a bit reductive. Here’s a decent write up about it:
https://medium.com/@ovenplayer/does-proton-really-support-trump-a-deeper-analysis-and-surprising-findings-aed4fee4305e