I really feel like this depends on the results of the numerous investigations taking place. If the investigations wind up showing that he has directly committed serious crimes (money laundering, conspiring against the United States, steering US policy based on personal financial enrichment, etc) then I think it hurts us more to let him walk. Are we going to just make it an accepted norm that if a criminal can achieve the presidency before being convicted of crimes, he is absolved of those crimes? That would seem to fly in the face of the idea that no person is above the law in this country. It's all rumor and speculation right now, but if Trump has truly been involved in some of the crimes that are speculated to have taken place, he will far exceed what Nixon did.
I get why you feel this way, and depending on what the results of the investigations are, I might be there as well. I cannot say this definitively though until we know what exactly he was aware of and involved in.
As far as anger and resentment, I don't think that is going anywhere, regardless. As has been said many times, Trump is a symptom, not the illness. The Trump base, the ones who will stick with him no matter what, aren't necessarily loyal to Trump the man. It's the idea's he espouses, and when the next carnival barker steps up saying the same things, they will latch on to him. The anger and resentment is baked into that segment of society at this point, and the idea that we should tread lightly to avoid upsetting them seems counterproductive.
