one chamber does not have any control upon the other.

...however, the Senate can censure him but, given the repug majority in the Senate, that won't happen, unfortunately.

Each house has the power to expel one of its own members, but that ain't happening either.

There was a great Daily Kos article recently about McConnell and his wife, not only does McConnell have links to China via the Chao connection, both he and the Chao family interlink with the Russians.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/1/13/1825790/-McConnell-and-the-Agents-of-Power-and-Influence?utm_campaign=recent

Might take against the cabinet member spouse of a Dem Sen Majority Leader... Plus we could find out about the Chao families cocaine distributing activities...

I LOVE THIS IDEA!

He can be expelled by a 2/3rds vote in the Senate, or he can be indicted.

I see some folks saying McConnell can't be impeached. That's wrong. The power of impeachment lies solely with the House, and the Senate has the sole power to try those impeachments. Therein lies the rub -- the same Senators that elected McConnell their leader would be the ones to try the case.

The impeachment of Senator Blount

For the first time in U.S. history, the House of Representatives exercises its constitutional power of impeachment and votes to charge Senator William Blount of Tennessee with “a high misdemeanor, entirely inconsistent with his public duty and trust as a Senator.”

In 1790, President George Washington appointed Blount, who had fought in the American Revolution, as governor of the “Territory South of the River Ohio,” now known as Tennessee. Although he was a successful territorial governor, personal financial problems led him to enter into a conspiracy with British officers to enlist frontiersmen and Cherokee Indians to assist the British in conquering parts of Spanish Florida and Louisiana. Before the conspiracy was uncovered, Blount presided over the Tennessee Constitutional Convention and in 1796 became the state’s first U.S. senator.

The plot was revealed in 1797, and on July 7 the House of Representatives voted to impeach Senator Blount. The next day, the Senate voted by a two-thirds majority to expel him from its ranks. On December 17, 1798, the Senate exercised its “sole power to try all impeachments,” as granted by the Constitution, and initiated a Senate trial against Blount. As vice president of the United States, Thomas Jefferson was president of the Senate and thus presided over the impeachment trial proceedings. After two months, Jefferson and the Senate decided to dismiss the charges against Blount, determining that the Senate had no jurisdiction over its own members beyond its constitutional right to expel members by a two-thirds majority vote. By the time of the dismissal, Blount had already been elected as a senator to the Tennessee state legislature, where he was appointed speaker. The constitutional conundrum of conducting a trial of an impeached senator has not yet been resolved.

indeed impeached, it is important to place this lone example in context. This was ten years after the US Constitution went into effect, and as the last paragraph notes, it was not resolved after the House took action. In the years that followed, it was agreed and accepted that member of the House and Senate are not considered "officers of the United States." Hence, in the 220+ years since Blount's case, only members of the executive and judicial branches of the federal government can be impeached by the House, and tried in the Senate. While this may seem wrong to you and I, it is not possible to impeach a senator today.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It therefore overrides anything agreed and accepted if those agreements conflict with it. Unless and until there is either a SCOTUS ruling or an amendment which precludes it, the House can impeach a Senator.