I think the successful installation of the Dershowitz precedent signals the end.

When they new the fix was in

As long as they were going to vote for his acquittal

They might as well vote for his coronation

They'll flip back and "change their minds" as soon as a Democrat is elected.

will never get elected once we get Emperor Trump. He will never give up his throne after this.

I think it's over.

by that argument in his view a permanent GOP majority is “in the best interest of the nation”, so why bother? Get ready for president Jarvanka...

They may even allow Democrats to win some seats in order to make it look legit to the rest of the world.

But, I'm not at all confident that a Democrat will ever occupy the White House again. They have effectively been able to stage a coronation of Trump.

Could legal experts on DU please explain?

So some asshole stood up in the Senate chamber, flapped his arms, and shouted that a president can do anything at all to get re-elected, as long as he thinks the country's better off with him in office. (And what president doesn't think that?)

Is that really now established law, just because some asshole shouted it in the Senate? Is the Constitution, with its clearly-defined separation of powers, now null and void? Just because someone shouted some bullshit that even he doesn't believe?

What am I missing here? Again, I ask DU'ers with legal expertise to provide their insights. Thank you.

In other words, the Dershowitz Precedent becomes accepted interpretation of existing law- meaning in effect that Trump or any other President can from this point forward do anything they want in pursuit of re-election so long as they say that their re-election equates to the national best interest.

Or is it just assumed, without them saying so, that any and all arguments made by the defense are part and parcel of the Senate's decision to acquit, so that all become precedents?

It will be generally assumed from this point forward that abuse of power is not possible, on the part of any President, so long as his or her actions are carried out in an attempt to be re-elected. The underlying principle, put forth by Dershowiz that every President believes their election to be in the best interest and therefore any action taken in furtherance of this aim is legal.

Think of it this way: US Special Forces killed Osama Bin Laden on the orders of President Obama in the interest of protecting this nation. Trump could now, by the Dershowitz Precedent, conceivably have the Democratic nominee for President killed on the grounds that his or her election would threaten US security by preventing him (Trump) from remaining as President. Yes, it's that serious.

...then I'm guessing lawsuits are filed by aggrieved parties, and eventually make their way to the Supreme Court - whose Republican majority is as corrupt is the Senate's Republican majority.

Situations exactly like what you're describing (along with overturning Roe) are why they fought so very hard for Kavanaugh.

I am willing to lay down my life if necessary in the cause of restoring the American Republic.

They wanted Civil War. IF Trump goes full dictator, they've got their fucking Civil War.

Let the country grind to a literal halt. Nothing gets Republicans' attention like losing their precious money.