Really?
Yes Secretary of War William Belknap was convicted by the Senate after he left office.
It is at point #4 where IMO your line of reasoning falls apart.
Firstly, אדם מועד לעולם is NOT the standard of the American legal system. In America, if someone acted in Good Faith, believing his action was not wrong, they cannot be convicted for it, IINM.
Secondly, even Halachically you are misapplying the concept of אדם מועד לעולם. In this scenario, from a halachic concept, rioters would by mandated to pay for the damage even if they claim they were incited or following orders or acting in Good Faith, because אדם מועד לעולם. Trump's actions would remain at most a גרמי, which would make him פטור מדיני אדם.
First of all, the Shu'a paskens גרמי is Chayev, not Pattur. The Shach says that includes גרמא.
Second, believing you are acting in good faith is אומר מותר, which is sometimes considered קרוב למזיד, because היה לו ללמוד ולא למד. It is certainly not an extenuating claim in Dini Mamonos.(Granted, in Halacha incitement is generally not punishable because of אין שליח לדבר עבירה)
As far as US law, civil and criminal liability do not at all require bad faith. See car accidents for example. People spend plenty of time in prison for behaving recklessly even though they do so in good faith believing no harm would happen.
Somebody who kills while acting in good faith is duly punishable both under US law and according to the Torah (less severely than premeditated malicious intent), and that's not a coincidence, the modern English legal system is loosely based on Judeo-Christian values from the Torah.
Good or bad faith is irrelevant here.
2) Yup, some yoyo in a Viking hat said so.
I didn't count, but I think there are dozens of insurrectionists who testified they were incited by Trump.
Is your defense that they're all lying? They can be called to testify and cross examined. Why do Republican Senators oppose that?
Here's one I happened to see a few minutes ago.
https://twitter.com/nickknudsenus/status/1359920014099243011 I must be his fault!
Not the relevant bar. Whether or not the insurrection was his fault is irrelevant. He is guilty if 1 insurrectionist was incited by him.
They would NEVER have been violent without it!
Again, not the bar. He would be guilty even if there was no violence at all and Congress proceedings were disrupted peacefully. The impeachment count doesn't require any violence to have happened.