Just adding to what is already said on border non-enforcement topic:
Impeachment is a political process that takes place in the political chambers based (partly) on constitutional issues. Before Pelosi-Schiff started screwing around with it, the term used to be conflated with the removal part of the process, not merely a tactic to divide the country and weaken the sitting President. [How could anything weaken Joe Biden?]
As a practical matter, removal happens only when the President's only party turns on him.
In the current context, it would take only 4 Dems in the House to turn on him to make a majority, but it would not come to a vote without the Speaker's support. We don't 4 Dems or the Speaker turning on him in this Congress.
Then there is the idea that making a case for impeachment could be part of R's taking the House back. They are already projected to do that without that. I'm not sure the public is eager for another (botched) impeachment and removal trial.
On the Senate side it takes 2/3rds majority, 67 Senators, voting to convict. Right now we have zero Dems and certainly not all 50 R's. After the midterms you still have roughly zero Dems and not all R's voting yes.
If you could remove Biden, you get Harris. If you could remove both simultaneously, you get Pelosi. If you wait for after the midterms, you would get Kevin McCarthy, but then for sure no Dems will vote yes.
Border non-enforcement for example is a policy issue (to them). Frankly, if a person like Joe Manchin broke that far from his party, he wouldn't be a Democrat and 17 aren't about to switch parties.
Then it comes to back, in my estimation, to just making the political case that these people are destroying our country.
That does not mean we should not publish Articles of Impeachment here for people to see - that would be passed unanimously if every officeholder in Congress put the constitution and the country ahead of politics and their party.