Assuming that somehow the Republicans managed to get the 2/3rds needed to impeach Biden, then they probably have distorted the system enough that the same procedure would work to impeach Harris. From here, preventing a new vice president from being appointed is trivial as that only requires the majority of the senate to block it. Then the speaker (who is almost certainly in Republican in such a scenario) becomes president. He appoints Trump to be vice president, who is easily confirmed by the majority of the senate, and then the speaker resigns restoring the white house to its rightful owner. 
In fact, it requires majorities of both the Senate and the House to fill a vacancy in the Vice Presidency per the 25th Amendment.
Yes, you’d have to be completely out of touch with American politics to think the Republicans aren’t overwhelming favorites to retake both the House and Senate.
As to whether the Republican house would impeach Biden, even knowing he wouldn’t get convicted in the Senate, I would be surprised if they didn’t. Their voter base would demand it, and they are slaves to their base.
Further by impeaching Biden on trivial matters they dilute the impact of impeachment. It becomes just a routine thing that happens to every president in his third year of office. This helps Trump and any future Republican presidents who might want to skirt the standards of moral and legal behavior from being held accountable.
Under which category would he be impeached so far: Bribery, Treason, High Crimes/Misdemeanors? What square peg action by Biden do they fit into that square hole?
All of the above! Proof? Who needs proof when you have attitude!
Stranger
He’s a Democrat. That’s all the proof they need.
Here is the text from Greene’s impeachment bill.
Basically, he’s accused of interfering in keeping Hunter from being investigated by Ukraine (so probably obstruction of justice), and bribery involving Hunter’s contracts with China. At the end she also attempts to shoe-horn in some kind of election integrity and national security stuff, but that’s just pablum without any actual additional specific accusations.
So just the usual manufactured scandal. If they got 33 hearings out of Bengazi, I’m pretty sure they can get 50 out of Hunter’s laptop. But god forbid they investigate an actual coupe attempt.
Any replacement VP would be Garlanded. (Garlanded in the new Borked.) And as far as needing 2/3rds of Senators to convict, is that 2/3rds of a hundred or 2/3rds of the Senators who happen to be still breathing?
“House Republicans will not automatically move to impeach President Biden if they regain control of the chamber in this year’s midterm elections, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said Sunday.”
McCarthy will soon receive new orders from Mar-A-Lago, expect a revision of his pledge.
Now, no need to exaggerate; only five House committees, a Senate Select Committee and Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, House Select Committee, and State Department Accountability Review Board, plus an FBI investigation, all of which turned up exactly nothing remotely actionable. Contrast that with a single House Select Committee on the attempt to overthrow the 2020 presidential election.
Pretty sure any exploratory investigations of Biden’s impeachability are going to sift through the Presidential Pocket Lint. Biden is so fucking boring it’s going to be difficult to even make a spectacle of him. What are they going to do, make Tara Reade their star witness just for the clicks?
“How can you tell if Kevin McCarthy is lying? His lips are moving.”
Stranger
This is where I got the number of hearings as 33. This says 10 investigations.
So I guess it was 5 committees, conducting 10 investigations, resulting in 33 hearings.
ETA: I posted after just reading the headlines, rather than the articles so what I have above is probably wrong.
It looks like the 33 hearings were just from the house select committee, and so didn’t include the other 9 investigations Strangers on the train mentioned (5 of which were from the house not including the select committee).
No wonder they couldn’t find time to pass or reauthorize the Zadroga Act for Medical Care of 9/11 Responders
Stranger
Like a Republican leader’s word means anything. See: McConnell and Graham on filling a SC seat during an election year.
“The president nominates. The Senate confirms. The American people should have a voice, not this lame duck president out the door,” McConnell told “Fox News Sunday.” “All we are doing is following the long-standing tradition of not fulfilling a nomination in the middle of a presidential year.”
“If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination,” Graham said March 10, 2016. “And you could use my words against me, and you’d be absolutely right.”
They straight up lie and they don’t care if they get called out on it. Anything McCarthy says should be taken as the bullshit it is.
This is the tertiary benefit of this (primary = damage Biden, secondary = revenge for Trump), from the GOP perspective. If you believe in a strong executive, and have not-so-subtle plans to use the power of the executive to keep power in the future, then weakening the one nuclear option the legislature has over the executive has obvious appeal.
If you can turn impeachment into a nothing-burger then you have insulated any future POTUS from the one method by which they can be removed from power.
As to McCarthy’s claims to the contrary, well I chuckled… surely you don’t believe him, right @agzem?
Aren’t Congress and the Senate judge and jury with no right of appeal? In other words if they decide “lookin’ at Trump funny” is a High Crime or Misdemeanour, and that Biden is guilty of it, then who is to say they are wrong?
Well, I assume they present as “evidence” will have some credibility with the American people.
I know, I shouldn’t do that.
You can always tell when a GOP official is lying: it’s when he’s talking.
I would assume that such “evidence” will be consistent with the rest of the narrative that they have been presenting to their base, and will have an exceptionally high degree of credibility with said base. I would also expect that they truly won’t care if the “evidence” has any credibility at all with the rest of the population.