Another fun fact, in case I haven't mentioned it previously:
The second vote on disqualification from future office, only requires a simple majority - not 2/3rds.
So let's play this out a bit.
Suppose, for the purposes of discussion, that the Senate proceeds with the impeachment trial and convicts Trump, and then takes the second vote and disqualifies him from holding future office. And/or suppose, for the purposes of discussion, that Trump is charged with sedition, insurrection, rebellion or other such thing, and found guilty by a jury in a court of law; which, presumably, would disqualify Trump from holding future office under the 14th Amendment.
Also suppose that two or three years from now, when the presidential campaigns for 2024 begin, Trump is mentally and physically healthy, he has retained a good portion of his base of fervent supporters, and his $200 million campaign war chest remains intact or even grows. Also suppose Trump's present iron grip on the Republican party, and thus the Republican Party nomination, remains intact.
With or without such good fortune, I know of nothing that could stop Trump from declaring he is a candidate for president and proceeding with a campaign. A number of red states would likely grant him ballot access without complaint. Blue states may act to keep Trump off the ballot, citing impeachment and conviction by Congress or conviction in a court of law. But Trump can sue to reverse that (may or may not succeed) and continue to raise funds and campaign as a write-in candidate where ballot access has been denied.
The laws do not say a convicted-and-disqualified Trump cannot seek public office. They say he cannot hold public office. Regardless of impeachment and court outcomes regarding Trump's eligibility to hold office, he remains free to raise as much hell as ever by running for president in the 2024 election.
If Trump actually won the election in the above hypothetical scenario, the Supreme Court would likely get involved then if not before. If Trump was indeed convicted for disqualifying crimes by Congress or a court, I would think the Supreme Court would rule he cannot be seated; in which case we could thank Donald Trump once again for bringing America into a constitutional crisis.
The above scenario is unlikely. It assumes too many things have to go right for a greatly diminished Trump over an extended period of time. In the near and continuing future, Trump is going to be referred to as "defendant" far more than "candidate."